32
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Evaluating Surveillance for and Estimating Administration of Rabies Postexposure Prophylaxis in the United States, 2012–2018

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          An evaluation of postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) surveillance has not been conducted in over 10 years in the United States. An accurate assessment would be important to understand current rabies trends and inform public health preparedness and response to human rabies.

          Methodology/Principle findings

          To understand PEP surveillance, we sent a survey to public health leads for rabies in 50 U.S. states, Puerto Rico, Washington DC, Philadelphia, and New York City. Of leads from 54 jurisdictions, 39 (72%) responded to the survey; 12 reported having PEP-specific surveillance, five had animal bite surveillance that included data about PEP, four had animal bite surveillance without data about PEP, and 18 (46%) had neither. Although 12 jurisdictions provided data about PEP use, poor data quality and lack of national representativeness prevented use of this data to derive a national-level PEP estimate.

          We used national-level and state specific data from the Healthcare Cost & Utilization Project (HCUP) to estimate the number of people who received PEP based on emergency department (ED) visits. The estimated annual average of initial ED visits for PEP administration during 2012–2017 in the United States was 46,814 (SE: 1,697), costing upwards of 165 million USD. State-level ED data for initial visits for administration of PEP for rabies exposure using HCUP data was compared to state-level surveillance data from Maryland, Vermont, and Georgia between 2012–2017. In all states, state-level surveillance data was consistently lower than estimates of initial ED visits, suggesting even states with robust PEP surveillance may not adequately capture individuals who receive PEP.

          Conclusions

          Our findings suggest that making PEP a nationally reportable condition may not be feasible. Other methods of tracking administration of PEP such as syndromic surveillance or identification of sentinel states should be considered to obtain an accurate assessment.

          Author summary

          Although rabies is nearly always fatal, it is also almost 100% preventable. While thousands of people receive PEP each year, the total amount of PEP administered in the United States and whether it is administered correctly, is unknown. To understand PEP use nationally, the National Association of State Public Health Veterinarians in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), sent a survey to public health professionals in the 50 U.S. states, Puerto Rico, Washington DC, Philadelphia, and New York City. Only half of responding jurisdictions had some method of tracking the number of people who had an animal bite or received rabies PEP; these methods differed in quality and completeness. For three states that had PEP data from their surveillance systems and also state-level emergency department (ED) data on the number of initial ED visits for PEP administration, discordant numbers suggested that the number of people who receive PEP may be much higher than estimated. Monitoring PEP administration through ED data could be one way to ensure that people receive appropriate PEP after an exposure and that costs are better understood.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Update on overall prevalence of major birth defects--Atlanta, Georgia, 1978-2005.

          (2008)
          Major structural or genetic birth defects affect approximately 3% of births in the United States, are a major contributor to infant mortality, and result in billions of dollars in costs for care. Although the causes of most major birth defects are unknown, concerns have been raised that certain factors, such as an increase in the prevalence of diabetes among women, might result in increased prevalence of birth defects over time. This report updates previously published data from the Metropolitan Atlanta Congenital Defects Program (MACDP), the oldest population-based birth defects surveillance system in the United States with active case ascertainment. For the period 1978-2005, CDC assessed the overall prevalence of major birth defects and their frequency relative to selected maternal and infant characteristics. The MACDP results indicated that the prevalence of major birth defects in metropolitan Atlanta, Georgia, remained stable during 1978-2005 but varied by maternal age and race/ethnicity, birthweight, and gestational age. Tracking the overall prevalence of major birth defects can identify subgroups that are affected disproportionately; additional measures focused on these subgroups might improve preconception care and care during pregnancy to prevent birth defects.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Establishment of a Canine Rabies Burden in Haiti through the Implementation of a Novel Surveillance Program

            The Republic of Haiti is one of only several countries in the Western Hemisphere in which canine rabies is still endemic. Estimation methods have predicted that 130 human deaths occur per year, yet existing surveillance mechanisms have detected few of these rabies cases. Likewise, canine rabies surveillance capacity has had only limited capacity, detecting only two rabid dogs per year, on average. In 2013, Haiti initiated a community-based animal rabies surveillance program comprised of two components: active community bite investigation and passive animal rabies investigation. From January 2013 –December 2014, 778 rabies suspect animals were reported for investigation. Rabies was laboratory-confirmed in 70 animals (9%) and an additional 36 cases were identified based on clinical diagnosis (5%), representing an 18-fold increase in reporting of rabid animals compared to the three years before the program was implemented. Dogs were the most frequent rabid animal (90%). Testing and observation ruled out rabies in 61% of animals investigated. A total of 639 bite victims were reported to the program and an additional 364 bite victims who had not sought medical care were identified during the course of investigations. Only 31% of people with likely rabies exposures had initiated rabies post-exposure prophylaxis prior to the investigation. Rabies is a neglected disease in-part due to a lack of surveillance and understanding about the burden. The surveillance methods employed by this program established a much higher burden of canine rabies in Haiti than previously recognized. The active, community-based bite investigations identified numerous additional rabies exposures and bite victims were referred for appropriate medical care, averting potential human rabies deaths. The use of community-based rabies surveillance programs such as HARSP should be considered in canine rabies endemic countries.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Mobile Phones As Surveillance Tools: Implementing and Evaluating a Large-Scale Intersectoral Surveillance System for Rabies in Tanzania

              Katie Hampson and colleagues describe their experience of developing and deploying a large-scale rabies surveillance system based on mobile phones in southern Tanzania.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: MethodologyRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS Negl Trop Dis
                PLoS Negl Trop Dis
                plos
                PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1935-2727
                1935-2735
                25 October 2021
                October 2021
                : 15
                : 10
                : e0009878
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Division of High Consequence Pathogens and Pathology, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America
                [2 ] Epidemic Intelligence Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America
                [3 ] Bureau of Infectious Disease and Laboratory Sciences, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
                [4 ] New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, New York, New York, United States of America
                Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, SWITZERLAND
                Author notes

                The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5158-0282
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2460-0911
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1617-0798
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2634-355X
                Article
                PNTD-D-21-01006
                10.1371/journal.pntd.0009878
                8568135
                34695115
                cd856e23-a406-4120-8788-093ef336a9e9

                This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

                History
                : 6 July 2021
                : 5 October 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 0, Pages: 11
                Funding
                The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Public and Occupational Health
                Preventive Medicine
                Prophylaxis
                Post-Exposure Prophylaxis
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Tropical Diseases
                Neglected Tropical Diseases
                Rabies
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Infectious Diseases
                Viral Diseases
                Rabies
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Infectious Diseases
                Zoonoses
                Rabies
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Epidemiology
                Disease Surveillance
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Critical Care and Emergency Medicine
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Public and Occupational Health
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Research Design
                Survey Research
                Surveys
                Computer and Information Sciences
                Data Management
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Epidemiology
                Disease Surveillance
                Infectious Disease Surveillance
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Infectious Diseases
                Infectious Disease Control
                Infectious Disease Surveillance
                Custom metadata
                vor-update-to-uncorrected-proof
                2021-11-04
                Data contains potentially identifying information about public health professionals. This protocol was reviewed by human subject research experts with the understanding that data would be housed on secured government data servers. Upon request, data are available from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data. Requests should be made to rabies@cdc.gov or 404-639-1050. All other relevant data on PEP are found within the manuscript or from the Heathcare Cost and Utilization Project ( https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/).

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                Infectious disease & Microbiology

                Comments

                Comment on this article