Novel Equine Faecal Egg Diagnostics: Validation of the FECPAKG2

Simple Summary Faecal egg counts (FECs) are the standard method of diagnosing the level of intestinal parasites in horses and other grazing animals. Testing before treatment is an important factor in slowing the appearance of drug resistance in these parasites. The FECPAK(G2), optimised for livestock, allows owners to perform FECs by tapping into remote expertise. However, the performance of the FECPAK(G2)has yet to be assessed for equids. Therefore, a comparison of the FECPAK(G2)(G2) method with an accepted non-remote equine FEC method (FECPAK(G1)) was performed, using samples of faeces from horses in Wales and New Zealand. The FECPAK(G2)performed equally as well as the control method (FECPAK(G1)), and this was true regardless of the data's country of origin. The mean percentage accuracy of the G2 test compared to the control values was 101%. The relative accuracy of the G2 method compared to the control method was not affected by the level of infection and it was concluded that the FECPAK(G2)method is suitable for performing FECs in horses. It is anticipated that the user-friendliness of the method will increase the uptake of FECs amongst horse owners by the direct use of the technology or through their veterinary practice, likely slowing the development of anthelmintic resistance. Faecal egg counts (FECs) are the standard method of diagnosing the level of parasitic helminth egg shedding in horses and other grazing animals. Testing before treatment is an important factor in slowing the appearance of anthelmintic resistance in nematode parasites. The FECPAK(G2), optimised for livestock, is reported to allow owners to perform FECs on their own animals without the need for a separate microscope or any specialist knowledge by tapping into remote expertise. However, the performance of the FECPAK(G2)has yet to be assessed for equids. Therefore, a comparison of the FECPAK(G2)(G2) method with an accepted equine FEC method (FECPAK(G1)(G1)) was performed, using faecal samples from 57 horses in Wales and 22 horses in New Zealand. There was a significant correlation between the FECs obtained by the two methods (p< 0.001) and no effect of the country of origin on the data (p= 0.157). The mean percentage accuracy compared to the control values (mean G2 count as a percentage of the mean G1 count, +/- SStandard Error (SE)) was 101 +/- 4%. There was no significant interaction between the method applied and the country of origin of the data (p= 0.814). The relative accuracy of the G2 method compared to the control method (FECPAK(G1)) was not affected by the level of infection (p= 0.124) and it was concluded that the FECPAK(G2)method is a suitable method of performing FECs in horses. It is anticipated that the user-friendliness of the method will increase the uptake of FECs amongst horse owners, either by the direct use of the technology or through their veterinary practice, likely slowing the development of anthelmintic resistance.