Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Author’ response
Author’s reply
Authors' response
Authors#x2019; response
Book Received
Book Review
Book Reviews
Centenary Review Article
Clinical Image
Clinical Images
Commentary
Communicable Diseases - Original Articles
Correspondence
Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Correspondences
Correspondences & Authors’ Responses
Corrigendum
Critique
Editorial
Errata
Erratum
Health Technology Innovation
IAA CONSENSUS DOCUMENT
Innovations
Letter to Editor
Malnutrition & Other Health Issues - Original Articles
Media & News
Notice of Retraction
Obituary
Original Article
Original Articles
Perspective
Policy
Policy Document
Policy Guidelines
Policy, Review Article
Policy: Correspondence
Policy: Editorial
Policy: Mapping Review
Policy: Original Article
Policy: Perspective
Policy: Process Paper
Policy: Scoping Review
Policy: Special Report
Policy: Systematic Review
Policy: Viewpoint
Practice
Practice: Authors’ response
Practice: Book Review
Practice: Clinical Image
Practice: Commentary
Practice: Correspondence
Practice: Letter to Editor
Practice: Obituary
Practice: Original Article
Practice: Pages From History of Medicine
Practice: Perspective
Practice: Review Article
Practice: Short Note
Practice: Short Paper
Practice: Special Report
Practice: Student IJMR
Practice: Systematic Review
Pratice, Original Article
Pratice, Review Article
Pratice, Short Paper
Programme
Programme, Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Programme: Commentary
Programme: Correspondence
Programme: Editorial
Programme: Original Article
Programme: Originial Article
Programme: Perspective
Programme: Rapid Review
Programme: Review Article
Programme: Short Paper
Programme: Special Report
Programme: Status Paper
Programme: Systematic Review
Programme: Viewpoint
Protocol
Research Correspondence
Retraction
Review Article
Short Paper
Special Opinion Paper
Special Report
Special Section Nutrition & Food Security
Status Paper
Status Report
Strategy
Student IJMR
Systematic Article
Systematic Review
Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis
Viewpoint
White Paper
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Author’ response
Author’s reply
Authors' response
Authors#x2019; response
Book Received
Book Review
Book Reviews
Centenary Review Article
Clinical Image
Clinical Images
Commentary
Communicable Diseases - Original Articles
Correspondence
Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Correspondences
Correspondences & Authors’ Responses
Corrigendum
Critique
Editorial
Errata
Erratum
Health Technology Innovation
IAA CONSENSUS DOCUMENT
Innovations
Letter to Editor
Malnutrition & Other Health Issues - Original Articles
Media & News
Notice of Retraction
Obituary
Original Article
Original Articles
Perspective
Policy
Policy Document
Policy Guidelines
Policy, Review Article
Policy: Correspondence
Policy: Editorial
Policy: Mapping Review
Policy: Original Article
Policy: Perspective
Policy: Process Paper
Policy: Scoping Review
Policy: Special Report
Policy: Systematic Review
Policy: Viewpoint
Practice
Practice: Authors’ response
Practice: Book Review
Practice: Clinical Image
Practice: Commentary
Practice: Correspondence
Practice: Letter to Editor
Practice: Obituary
Practice: Original Article
Practice: Pages From History of Medicine
Practice: Perspective
Practice: Review Article
Practice: Short Note
Practice: Short Paper
Practice: Special Report
Practice: Student IJMR
Practice: Systematic Review
Pratice, Original Article
Pratice, Review Article
Pratice, Short Paper
Programme
Programme, Correspondence, Letter to Editor
Programme: Commentary
Programme: Correspondence
Programme: Editorial
Programme: Original Article
Programme: Originial Article
Programme: Perspective
Programme: Rapid Review
Programme: Review Article
Programme: Short Paper
Programme: Special Report
Programme: Status Paper
Programme: Systematic Review
Programme: Viewpoint
Protocol
Research Correspondence
Retraction
Review Article
Short Paper
Special Opinion Paper
Special Report
Special Section Nutrition & Food Security
Status Paper
Status Report
Strategy
Student IJMR
Systematic Article
Systematic Review
Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis
Viewpoint
White Paper
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Original Article
139 (
3
); 459-462

Demographics of animal bite victims & management practices in a tertiary care institute in Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Seth GS Medical College & KEM Hospital, Mumbai, India
University of Massachusetts Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

Reprint requests: Dr N.J. Gogtay, Additional Professor, Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Seth G.S. Medical College & KEM Hospital, New M.S. Building 1st Floor, Acharya Donde Marg, Parel, Mumbai 400 012, India e-mail: njgogtay@hotmail.com

Licence

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Disclaimer:
This article was originally published by Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher.

Abstract

Background & objectives:

Rabies is an important public health problem worldwide and more than 55,000 people die annually of the disease. The King Edward Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, is a tertiary referral centre where a rabies clinic runs 24 hours. In view of lack of information about the demographics of the disease in an urban environment the present study was carried out.

Methods:

Data on 1000 consecutive animal bite victims presenting to the institute in 2010 were collected over a 15 wk period. An electronic database was specially created for capturing information and was modelled on the information available from the WHO expert consultation on rabies, 2005. Economic burden from the patients’ perspective was calculated using both direct and indirect costs.

Results:

The victims were largely males (771 subjects). The dog was the major biting animal (891, 89.1%). Bites were mainly of Category III (783, 78.3%). One twenty three subjects used indigenous treatments only for local wound care. Of the Category III bites, only 21 of 783 (2.7%) patients were prescribed human rabies immunoglobulin (HRIG) which was primarily for severe bites or bites close to or on the face. A total of 318 patients did not complete the full Essen regime of the vaccine. The median cost to the patient per bite was 220 (3.5 USD).

Interpretation & conclusions:

Our findings showed that the use of HRIG was low with less than 2 per cent of the Category III patients being prescribed it. As vaccine and HRIG continue to remain expensive, the intradermal vaccine, shorter regimes like the Zagreb regime and monoclonal antibodies may offer safer and cost-effective options in the future. Further studies need to be done in different parts of the country.

Keywords

Animal bites
dog
HRIG
urban environment
vaccination

Rabies is an important public health problem worldwide and more than 50,000 people die annually of the disease1. The annual estimated number of dog bites in India is 17.4 million, leading to estimated 18,000-20,000 cases of human rabies per year2. As rabies is not a notifiable disease in India and most deaths occur in rural areas where surveillance is poor, it is widely believed that this figure may be an underestimate. In the past, a large proportion of rabies patients did not receive any vaccination, and many did not complete the full course. Sudarshan et al3 showed that the nerve tissue vaccine formed the mainstay of treatment; a high proportion of bite victims (39.5%) did not follow wound care, the use of rabies immunoglobulin was low (2.1%) and recourse to indigenous treatment was widely prevalent3.

The King Edward VII Memorial (KEM) Hospital in Mumbai, India is a tertiary referral centre with a rabies clinic that runs 24 hours. The present observational study was carried out in July to September 2010 in the rabies clinic of KEM Hospital, Mumbai, India, to collect demographic data on animal bite victims.

The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board and written, informed consent/assent was obtained from the bite victims over a 15 week period in 2010. An electronic database modelled on the information available from the WHO expert consultation on rabies was used4. Briefly, demographics, the Kuppuswamy index 20075, past history of dog bite, nature of the bite, whether the animal was a pet or a stray, extent of injury, post bite treatment, and status of biting animals following the bite were collected from 1000 consecutive patients. Economic burden from the patients’ perspective was calculated using both direct and indirect costs.

Results & Discussion

The victims were largely male (771, 77.1%), and the dog was the major biting animal (891, 89.1%). Bites were mainly of Category III 783 (78.3%). Only 308 victims washed their wounds with soap and water (Table).

Table Demographic characteristics of the patients (n = 1000)

All patients received the rabies vaccine free. Of the Category III bites, only 21/783 (2.7%) patients were prescribed human rabies immunoglobulin (HRIG). Of these 21, only two patients received HRIG from the hospital, while eight bought it from outside and the remaining did not actually take it for want of funds. Thirty two per cent did not complete the full Essen regime.

Patients visited the hospital from 2-6 times after the bite. The median cost to the patient per bite was 220 (3.5 US D) (range 10-8440; the upper figure indicating expenditure with HRIG). The number of working days or school days lost ranged from 0-12 days.

The present study conducted in 1000 consecutive patients in a tertiary referral centre in the city of Mumbai showed that Cat III bites form the majority of bites, only a quarter of these patients were actually prescribed HRIG, and eventually less than 2 per cent took it. The WHO recommendations include immediate wound washing, expeditious administration of rabies vaccine and for severe categories of exposure, infiltration of purified rabies immunoglobulin (RIG) in and around the wound6. RIG is rarely administered in low-income countries because it is expensive (from US D25 to over 200 depending on whether it is of equine or human origin)7 and in short supply8. Therefore, it is usually only post-exposure vaccination (without RIG) that is administered and our study confirms this. The primary reasons for non administration for HRIG in our study was the limited budget allocation for the HRIG, non availability at times in the market place and very few doses actually available for use. A limited quantity of equine RIG was previously available on the hospital schedule and was replaced in May 2010 in favor of the relatively safer HRIG.

Our study also showed that despite the bites occurring in an urban set up, only indigenous practices were used by 12.3 per cent patients (Table). This was lower than that reported by Sudarshan et al3, and was similar to the study done by Icchpujani et al9 in 1357 patients where 10.8 per cent of victims resorted to harmful and/or indigenous practices.

Rabies is considered one of the world's most neglected diseases in developing countries with a disproportionate burden amongst the rural poor and children10. In countries enzoonotic for rabies, cell culture vaccines continue to remain in short supply and unaffordable11. In Mumbai city, the preventive measures include 24 wards where dog bite cases are registered, a dog licensing department that carries out sterilization of stray dogs and liasoning with non government organizations (NGOs) for dog adoption and 18 municipal hospitals and 31 dispensaries where the vaccine is given free of cost12. The pilot project initiated by the National Centre for Disease Control in 2008 in five Indian cities to train medical professionals in animal-bite management and raising public awareness is one such initiative13. As the rabies vaccine as well as RIG continue to remain expensive, regimes with fewer doses like the Zagreb regime, the intradermal vaccine and monoclonal antibodies are likely to offer safe and cost-effective treatment option in the years to come14.

Acknowledgment

Authors thank Dr Sanjay Oak, Director, Seth GS Medical College & KEM Hospital, Mumbai, for permission to carry out the study, Dr Brett Leav, Mass Biologics, USA, for funding support for two authors (KP and SJS) to work at the institute and Dr Prasad Kulkarni, Serum Institute of India, Pune, for help in manuscript preparation.

References

  1. , , . Eliminating canine rabies, the principal source of human infection: what will it take? Antiviral Res. 2013;98:291-6.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. , , . Human rabies in the WHO Southeast Asia region: Forward steps for elimination. Adv Prev Med 2011 2011 383870
    [Google Scholar]
  3. , , , , , , . An epidemiological study of animal bites in India; results of a WHO sponsored national multi-centric rabies survey. J Commun Dis. 2006;38:32-9.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. WHO Expert Consultation on Rabies. WHO Technical Report series 931. Available from: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/trs/WHO_TRS_931_eng.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  5. , , , , . Kuppuswamy socioeconomic status scale-updating for 2007. Indian J Pediatr. 2007;74:1131-2.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. WHO recommendations for rabies post-exposure prophylaxis. . Available from: www.who.int/entity/rabies/PEProphylaxisguideline.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  7. , , , , , , . Re-evaluating the burden of rabies in Africa and Asia. Bull World Health Organ. 2005;83:360-8.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. , , , , , , , . Rabies exposures, post-exposure prophylaxis and deaths in a region of endemic canine rabies. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2008;2:e339.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. , , , , , , . Epidemiology of animal bites and rabies cases in India. A multicentric study. J Commun Dis. 2008;40:27-36.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. , , , , . Rabies, still neglected after 125 years of vaccination. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2010;4:e839.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. , , , , . Assessing the relationship between antigenicity and immunogenicity of human rabies vaccines when administered by the intradermal route: results of a metaanalysis. Hum Vaccine. 2010;6:562-5.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. , . India's ongoing war against rabies. Bull World Health Organ. 2009;87:890-1.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. , , , , , , . First administration to humans of a monoclonal antibody cocktail against rabies virus: safety, tolerability, and neutralizing activity. Vaccine. 2008;26:5922-7.
    [Google Scholar]

Fulltext Views
13

PDF downloads
7
View/Download PDF
Download Citations
BibTeX
RIS
Show Sections
Scroll to Top