Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Deborah E. Perzak x
  • Refine by Access: Content accessible to me x
Clear All Modify Search


Objective—To determine how viral shedding and development or lack of clinical disease relate to contact transmission of vesicular stomatitis virus New Jersey (VSV-NJ) in pigs and determine whether pigs infected by contact could infect other pigs by contact.

Animals—63 pigs.

Procedure—Serologically naive pigs were housed in direct contact with pigs that were experimentally inoculated with VSV-NJ via ID inoculation of the apex of the snout, application to a scarified area of the oral mucosa, application to intact oral mucosa, or ID inoculation of the ear. In a second experiment, pigs infected with VSV-NJ by contact were moved and housed with additional naive pigs. Pigs were monitored and sampled daily for clinical disease and virus isolation and were serologically tested before and after infection or contact.

Results—Contact transmission developed only when vesicular lesions were evident. Transmission developed rapidly; contact pigs shed virus as early as 1 day after contact. In pens in which contact transmission was detected, 2 of 3 or 3 of 3 contact pigs were infected.

Conclusion and Clinical Relevance—Transmission was lesion-dependent; however, vesicular lesions often were subtle with few or no clinical signs of infection. Contact transmission was efficient, with resulting infections ranging from subclinical (detected only by seroconversion) to clinical (development of vesicular lesions). Long-term maintenance of VSV-NJ via contact transmission alone appears unlikely. Pigs represent an efficient large-animal system for further study of VSV-NJ pathogenesis and transmission. (Am J Vet Res 2001;62:516–520)

Full access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research


Objective—To evaluate the quality of information regarding osteoarthritis (OA) in dogs currently available on the World Wide Web.

Design—Survey study.

Procedure—5 search engines were searched with the keywords "dog," "degenerative joint disease," "canine," and "osteoarthritis," and the first 50 sites listed by each search engine were analyzed. Unique Web site addresses were distributed to 3 diplomates of the American College of Veterinary Surgeons, who provided a standardized evaluation of each site.

Results—30 unique Web sites were evaluated. Twenty (66%) provided information consistent with conventional knowledge as outlined in textbooks and peer-reviewed literature, 8 (27%) provided experimental or anecdotal information in addition to conventional knowledge, and 2 (7%) provided misleading information. Mean scores for overall usefulness of the information provided in regard to clinical features of and treatment for OA were 1.3 and 1.5, respectively (1 = information of minimal use; 5 = very useful information). Twenty-three (77%) sites encouraged pet owners to seek the advice of a veterinarian. Twenty-three (77%) sites were given overall quality scores < 2, and 7 (23%) were given scores between 2 and 3 (1 = site was counterproductive; 5 = site was very valuable).

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggest that the quality of information currently available on the Web that addresses OA in dogs is questionable. Although most of the sites conveyed some conventional information with reasonable accuracy, the information was incomplete, of minimal use, and often considered counterproductive. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003;223:1272–1275)

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association