Skip to main content

Table 3 Farm structure, farrowing related medication and farrowing unit all-in-all-out practice among the 3 farm clusters

From: Structural characterization of piglet producing farms and their sow removal patterns in Finland

 

Cluster

Total

1 (n = 24)

2 (n = 10)

3 (n = 9)

n = 43

Variable

n (%)

n (%)

n (%)

n (%)

Combined breeding and gestation units = yes

2 (8.3)**

3 (30.0)

7 (77.8)**

12 (27.9)

Breeding unit feeder type

 locked stall

24 (100.0)**

9 (90.0)

3 (33.3)**

36 (83.7)

 trough

0 (0.0)**

1 (10.0)

6 (66.7)**

7 (16.3)

Gestation unit pen design

 group housing with electronic transponders

1 (4.2)

1 (10.0)

1 (11.1)

3 (7.0)

 pens without stalls

9 (37.5)

1 (10.0)*

6 (66.7)*

16 (37.2)

 pen with stalls

2 (8.3)

1 (10.0)

0 (0.0)

3 (7.0)

 pen with locked stalls

12 (50.0)

7 (70.0)

2 (22.2)

21 (48.8)

Farrowing induction

 never

8 (33.3)

2 (20.0)

7 (77.8)*

17 (39.5)

 sometimes

13 (54.2)

7 (70.0)

2 (22.2)*

22 (51.2)

 always

3 (12.5)

1 (10.0)

0 (0.0)

4 (9.3)

Use of oxytocin during farrowing

 0–3/10 farrowings

10 (41.7)

2 (20.0)

5 (55.6)

17 (40.0)

 4–7/10 farrowings

10 (41.7)

4 (40.0)

4 (44.4)

18 (41.9)

  > 7/10 farrowings

4 (16.7)

4 (40.0)

0 (0.0)

8 (18.6)

Farrowing unit all-in-all-out practice = yes

14 (58.3)*

3 (30.0)

1 (11.1)*

18 (41.9)

  1. Categories that are statistically significantly over-represented (bold) or under-represented in the cluster than in the overall frequency are specified as * (p < 0.05) and ** (p < 0.01). Table 1 presents detailed variable information