IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pntd00/0002059.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dog Bite Histories and Response to Incidents in Canine Rabies-Enzootic KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Melinda Hergert
  • Louis H Nel

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to report evaluated observations from survey records captured through a cross-sectional observational study regarding canine populations and dog owners in rabies enzootic KwaZulu-Natal province, South Africa. Our aim was to evaluate respondent knowledge of canine rabies and response to dog bite incidents towards improved rabies control. Six communities consisting of three land use types were randomly sampled from September 2009 to January 2011, using a cluster design. A total of 1992 household records were analyzed using descriptive statistics and regression modeling to evaluate source of rabies knowledge, experiences with dog bites, and factors affecting treatment received within respective households that occurred within the 365 day period prior to the surveys. 86% of the population surveyed had heard of rabies. Non-dog owners were 1.6 times more likely to have heard of rabies than dog owners; however, fear of rabies was not a reason for not owning a dog. Government veterinary services were reported most frequently as respondent source of rabies knowledge. Nearly 13% of households had a member bitten by a dog within the year prior to the surveys with 82% of the victims visiting a clinic as a response to the bite. 35% of these clinic visitors received at least one rabies vaccination. Regression modeling determined that the only response variable that significantly reflected the likelihood of a patient receiving rabies vaccination or not was the term for the area surveyed. Overall the survey showed that most respondents have heard of dog associated rabies and seek medical assistance at a clinic in response to a dog bite regardless of offending dog identification. An in-depth study involving factors associated within area clinics may highlight the area dependency for patients receiving rabies post exposure prophylaxis shown by this model. Author Summary: Canine rabies has been enzootic to KwaZulu-Natal province, South Africa since the mid-1970's. Vaccination requirements for domestic species and animal control laws enforced in industrialized countries frequently eliminate the need for rabies post exposure prophylaxis (PEP) when an animal bite occurs. Rabies deaths in Africa are frequently linked to poverty and ignorance resulting in a lack of urgency for PEP in an environment where less than 70% of the domestic dog population is vaccinated against the disease. The results presented here are part of a larger canine ecology study conducted in KwaZulu-Natal from September 2009 through January 2011. The six surveyed areas consisted of three land use types: three rural villages, two urban townships and one peri-urban township. The findings show that although a large portion of the population has awareness of rabies, there is a lack of understanding in the response to dog bites. Regression modeling of data suggests that there is an effect of area upon the result of a bite victim receiving PEP as part of treatment. Detailed retrospective study of dog bite incidence and an introspective study of clinics and treatment centers within the province may help explain the results found in this study.

Suggested Citation

  • Melinda Hergert & Louis H Nel, 2013. "Dog Bite Histories and Response to Incidents in Canine Rabies-Enzootic KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(4), pages 1-11, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0002059
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002059
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0002059
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0002059&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pntd.0002059?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0002059. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosntds (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.