Estimating the risk of rabies transmission to humans in the U.S.: a delphi analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In the United States, the risk of rabies transmission to humans in most situations of possible exposure is unknown. Controlled studies on rabies are clearly not possible. Thus, the limited data on risk has led to the frequent adminis...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Meltzer Martin I, Dhankhar Praveen, Manning Susan E, Vaidya Sagar A, Rupprecht Charles, Hull Harry F, Fishbein Daniel B
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2010-05-01
Series:BMC Public Health
Online Access:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/10/278
_version_ 1811260938592976896
author Meltzer Martin I
Dhankhar Praveen
Manning Susan E
Vaidya Sagar A
Rupprecht Charles
Hull Harry F
Fishbein Daniel B
author_facet Meltzer Martin I
Dhankhar Praveen
Manning Susan E
Vaidya Sagar A
Rupprecht Charles
Hull Harry F
Fishbein Daniel B
author_sort Meltzer Martin I
collection DOAJ
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In the United States, the risk of rabies transmission to humans in most situations of possible exposure is unknown. Controlled studies on rabies are clearly not possible. Thus, the limited data on risk has led to the frequent administration of rabies post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), often in inappropriate circumstances.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We used the Delphi method to obtain an expert group consensus estimate of the risk of rabies transmission to humans in seven scenarios of potential rabies exposure. We also surveyed and discussed the merits of recommending rabies PEP for each scenario.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The median risk of rabies transmission without rabies PEP for a bite exposure by a skunk, bat, cat, and dog was estimated to be 0.05, 0.001, 0.001, and 0.00001, respectively. Rabies PEP was unanimously recommended in these scenarios. However, rabies PEP was overwhelmingly not recommended for non-bite exposures (e.g. dog licking hand but unavailable for subsequent testing), estimated to have less than 1 in 1,000,000 (0.000001) risk of transmission.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our results suggest that there are many common situations in which the risk of rabies transmission is so low that rabies PEP should not be recommended. These risk estimates also provide a key parameter for cost-effective models of human rabies prevention and can be used to educate health professionals about situation-specific administration of rabies PEP.</p>
first_indexed 2024-04-12T18:55:03Z
format Article
id doaj.art-c087b4d255aa4006bf29e503b524362c
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1471-2458
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-12T18:55:03Z
publishDate 2010-05-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Public Health
spelling doaj.art-c087b4d255aa4006bf29e503b524362c2022-12-22T03:20:22ZengBMCBMC Public Health1471-24582010-05-0110127810.1186/1471-2458-10-278Estimating the risk of rabies transmission to humans in the U.S.: a delphi analysisMeltzer Martin IDhankhar PraveenManning Susan EVaidya Sagar ARupprecht CharlesHull Harry FFishbein Daniel B<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In the United States, the risk of rabies transmission to humans in most situations of possible exposure is unknown. Controlled studies on rabies are clearly not possible. Thus, the limited data on risk has led to the frequent administration of rabies post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), often in inappropriate circumstances.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We used the Delphi method to obtain an expert group consensus estimate of the risk of rabies transmission to humans in seven scenarios of potential rabies exposure. We also surveyed and discussed the merits of recommending rabies PEP for each scenario.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The median risk of rabies transmission without rabies PEP for a bite exposure by a skunk, bat, cat, and dog was estimated to be 0.05, 0.001, 0.001, and 0.00001, respectively. Rabies PEP was unanimously recommended in these scenarios. However, rabies PEP was overwhelmingly not recommended for non-bite exposures (e.g. dog licking hand but unavailable for subsequent testing), estimated to have less than 1 in 1,000,000 (0.000001) risk of transmission.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our results suggest that there are many common situations in which the risk of rabies transmission is so low that rabies PEP should not be recommended. These risk estimates also provide a key parameter for cost-effective models of human rabies prevention and can be used to educate health professionals about situation-specific administration of rabies PEP.</p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/10/278
spellingShingle Meltzer Martin I
Dhankhar Praveen
Manning Susan E
Vaidya Sagar A
Rupprecht Charles
Hull Harry F
Fishbein Daniel B
Estimating the risk of rabies transmission to humans in the U.S.: a delphi analysis
BMC Public Health
title Estimating the risk of rabies transmission to humans in the U.S.: a delphi analysis
title_full Estimating the risk of rabies transmission to humans in the U.S.: a delphi analysis
title_fullStr Estimating the risk of rabies transmission to humans in the U.S.: a delphi analysis
title_full_unstemmed Estimating the risk of rabies transmission to humans in the U.S.: a delphi analysis
title_short Estimating the risk of rabies transmission to humans in the U.S.: a delphi analysis
title_sort estimating the risk of rabies transmission to humans in the u s a delphi analysis
url http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/10/278
work_keys_str_mv AT meltzermartini estimatingtheriskofrabiestransmissiontohumansintheusadelphianalysis
AT dhankharpraveen estimatingtheriskofrabiestransmissiontohumansintheusadelphianalysis
AT manningsusane estimatingtheriskofrabiestransmissiontohumansintheusadelphianalysis
AT vaidyasagara estimatingtheriskofrabiestransmissiontohumansintheusadelphianalysis
AT rupprechtcharles estimatingtheriskofrabiestransmissiontohumansintheusadelphianalysis
AT hullharryf estimatingtheriskofrabiestransmissiontohumansintheusadelphianalysis
AT fishbeindanielb estimatingtheriskofrabiestransmissiontohumansintheusadelphianalysis