Use of rabies postexposure prophylaxis supplied by the Alaska Section of Epidemiology, Alaska, 2002-2007
- PMID: 19320368
- PMCID: PMC2646483
- DOI: 10.1177/003335490912400214
Use of rabies postexposure prophylaxis supplied by the Alaska Section of Epidemiology, Alaska, 2002-2007
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to summarize the Alaska experience in centralizing distribution of rabies postexposure prophylaxis (PEP).
Methods: Data were collected from standard treatment sheets used to track doses and notes related to the exposure investigations.
Results: From 2002 to 2007, the annual PEP usage rate was 2.2 per 100,000. Dogs were involved in 79% (68/86) of exposures. More than 50% (49/87) of people were exposed to a confirmed rabid animal; 31 (63%) of those people experienced nonbite exposures. Conversely, of the remaining 38 people exposed to an animal for which rabies status could not be confirmed, 35 (92%) sustained a bite or puncture. Direct and indirect costs averaged more than $3000 per person.
Conclusions: The Alaska PEP usage rate was lower and the proportion of people exposed to confirmed rabid animals was higher when compared with other states. Alaska public health personnel invested significant time to ensure that PEP was only given when indicated. Without this gatekeeper approach, PEP would likely be administered at a much higher rate because medical facility staff lacks the time or ability to investigate animal exposures to rule out rabies. In Alaska, centralizing rabies PEP not only serves the patient's best interest, but it also makes efficient use of a potentially scarce product and supports rabies surveillance efforts by guaranteeing animals for testing. Such a program might not be feasible for a more populous state or jurisdiction, or areas with different rabies epizootiology; however, that may change if the supply of rabies biologics changes in the future.
Similar articles
-
Human rabies exposures and postexposure prophylaxis in South Carolina, 1993-2002.Public Health Rep. 2006 Mar-Apr;121(2):197-202. doi: 10.1177/003335490612100215. Public Health Rep. 2006. PMID: 16528954 Free PMC article.
-
The first report evaluating the post-exposure rabies prophylaxis in children exposed to animals in the Lublin Province (Eastern Poland) in 2010-2016 - a retrospective study.Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2018;14(11):2660-2665. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2018.1477910. Epub 2018 Jun 28. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2018. PMID: 29771638 Free PMC article.
-
A retrospective evaluation of bites at risk of rabies transmission across 7 years: The need to improve surveillance and reporting systems for rabies elimination.PLoS One. 2018 Jul 2;13(7):e0197996. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197996. eCollection 2018. PLoS One. 2018. PMID: 29965994 Free PMC article.
-
[Rabies].Nihon Naika Gakkai Zasshi. 2004 Nov 10;93(11):2382-7. doi: 10.2169/naika.93.2382. Nihon Naika Gakkai Zasshi. 2004. PMID: 15624476 Review. Japanese. No abstract available.
-
Cat bites: a source of rabies exposure in rural Tennessee.Tenn Med. 2001 Mar;94(3):95-7. Tenn Med. 2001. PMID: 11242755 Review.
Cited by
-
Rabies in Alaska, from the past to an uncertain future.Int J Circumpolar Health. 2018 Dec;77(1):1475185. doi: 10.1080/22423982.2018.1475185. Int J Circumpolar Health. 2018. PMID: 29764319 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Rabies management structures and challenges in the North in a One Health framework.Int J Circumpolar Health. 2024 Dec;83(1):2318059. doi: 10.1080/22423982.2024.2318059. Epub 2024 Feb 18. Int J Circumpolar Health. 2024. PMID: 38369781 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Castrodale L, Walker V, Baldwin J, Hofmann J, Hanlon C. Rabies in a puppy imported from India to the USA, March 2007. Zoonoses Public Health. 2008;55:427–30. - PubMed
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous