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