Animal bite epidemiology and surveillance for rabies postexposure prophylaxis

Dale A. Moore Department of Biobehavioral Health, College of Health and Human Development, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802.

Search for other papers by Dale A. Moore in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD
,
William M. Sischo Department of Population Health and Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinary Medicine Teaching and Research Center, University of California, Tulare, CA 93274.

Search for other papers by William M. Sischo in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD
,
Allison Hunter Department of Population Health and Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinary Medicine Teaching and Research Center, University of California, Tulare, CA 93274.

Search for other papers by Allison Hunter in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 BS
, and
Toni Miles Department of Family Practice, College of Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX.

Search for other papers by Toni Miles in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MD, PhD

Abstract

Objective—To understand the epidemiology of animal bites and exposure, evaluate the animal exposure reporting system for surveillance of rabies postexposure prophylaxis (PEP), and identify opportunities to reduce PEP.

Design—Period prevalence survey.

Study Population—Pennsylvania residents in 1995.

Procedure—Data from animal bite reports from Pennsylvania county health offices were summarized for 1995. Animal bite incidences for the state, counties, various age groups, and various population densities were calculated. Animal species, treatment, location of wounds, and PEP recommendations were evaluated for exposures.

Results—More than 16,000 animal-related potential rabies exposures were reported from 65 of 67 counties in Pennsylvania. The highest incidence was in children less than 5 years old (324/100,000). Of the 75% of victims requiring wound treatment, 50% received antimicrobials, 29% received a tetanus toxoid, and 19% had wounds sutured, were admitted to hospitals, or were referred for plastic surgery. Although 75% of exposures were to dogs, victims exposed to cats were 6 times as likely to receive PEP (relative risk, 6.1; 95% confidence interval, 5.1 to 7.4). Thirty percent of 556 PEP were given for exposures to dogs, 44% for cats, 7% for raccoons, 4% for bats, 2.5% for squirrels, 2.1% for groundhogs, 2% for foxes, and 8% for exposures to other species. Fifty-nine percent of owned dogs were up-to-date on rabies vaccinations compared with 41% of owned cats.

Conclusion—Interventions, such as dog bite prevention education, vaccination of pets against rabies, appropriate use of PEP, and reduction of feral cat populations, should be instituted, enhanced, or better enforced in communities. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:190–194)

Abstract

Objective—To understand the epidemiology of animal bites and exposure, evaluate the animal exposure reporting system for surveillance of rabies postexposure prophylaxis (PEP), and identify opportunities to reduce PEP.

Design—Period prevalence survey.

Study Population—Pennsylvania residents in 1995.

Procedure—Data from animal bite reports from Pennsylvania county health offices were summarized for 1995. Animal bite incidences for the state, counties, various age groups, and various population densities were calculated. Animal species, treatment, location of wounds, and PEP recommendations were evaluated for exposures.

Results—More than 16,000 animal-related potential rabies exposures were reported from 65 of 67 counties in Pennsylvania. The highest incidence was in children less than 5 years old (324/100,000). Of the 75% of victims requiring wound treatment, 50% received antimicrobials, 29% received a tetanus toxoid, and 19% had wounds sutured, were admitted to hospitals, or were referred for plastic surgery. Although 75% of exposures were to dogs, victims exposed to cats were 6 times as likely to receive PEP (relative risk, 6.1; 95% confidence interval, 5.1 to 7.4). Thirty percent of 556 PEP were given for exposures to dogs, 44% for cats, 7% for raccoons, 4% for bats, 2.5% for squirrels, 2.1% for groundhogs, 2% for foxes, and 8% for exposures to other species. Fifty-nine percent of owned dogs were up-to-date on rabies vaccinations compared with 41% of owned cats.

Conclusion—Interventions, such as dog bite prevention education, vaccination of pets against rabies, appropriate use of PEP, and reduction of feral cat populations, should be instituted, enhanced, or better enforced in communities. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:190–194)

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 268 0 0
Full Text Views 1370 1120 41
PDF Downloads 282 136 15
Advertisement