Awareness among junior residents regarding management of animal bite in a tertiary care hospital in Haryana

Abstract

occur in rural areas of Africa and Asia. In India alone, 20,000 deaths (i.e., about 2/100,000 population at risk) are estimated to occur annually. India has 36% global and 65% Asian rabies burden in terms of cases. [1-3] The majority of deaths (84%) occur in rural areas. The estimated annual cost of rabies is US$6 billion (95% CI, 4.6-7.3 billion), with almost US$2 billion (~40%) due to lost productivity after premature deaths and a further US$1.6 billion spent directly on postexposure prophylaxis. [4] There are many myths and false beliefs associated with wound management. These include application of oils, herbs, and red chilies on the wounds inflicted by rabid animals, and improper washing of wounds. [5] General practitioners or junior residents constitute a key source of medical care for antirabies treatment to the victims of animal bites. The main objective of this study was to assess the knowledge among the junior residents in a tertiary care institute in Haryana regarding animal bite management. [6] Background: Animal bites in humans are a major public health problem. Rabies is a highly fatal disease, killing an estimated 20,000 people in India annually. This virtually fatal disease is nearly hundred percent preventable by appropriate postexposure prophylaxis. The knowledge regarding animal bite management among health professionals is of utmost importance for prevention of this deadly disease. Objective: To assess the awareness about animal bite management in prevention of transmission of rabies to humans among junior residents. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was undertaken among 120 randomly selected junior residents from various departments of the institute giving equal consideration to residents of clinical and paraclinical disciplines. The study was carried out in the month of September 2011 using the pretested semi-structured questionnaire. The data were analyzed by appropriate statistical tests using the SPSS software, version 18.0. Results: Residents of the clinical disciplines had better knowledge regarding burden of rabies (80%). Only 50% residents belonging to pre-and paraclinical disciplines had knowledge about correct categorization of animal bite wound. Only 52% residents of pre-and paraclinical disciplines were aware of intradermal antirabies vaccine schedule and immunoglobulin dose to be administered. Nearly two-thirds residents of clinical disciplines were aware of preexposure prophylaxis schedule. Conclusion: Owing to poor knowledge about prevention and management of such a deadly disease, special attention is needed in strengthening the fundamentals of management skills in internship and through orientation program to junior residents.

Management of dog bites by frontline service providers in primary healthcare facilities in the Greater Accra Region of Ghana, 2014–2015

“…Our study found that over 50% of service providers were aware of the anti-RIG dose to be administered. This is similar to results obtained by Shashikantha, who showed that 52% of service providers were aware of the anti-RIG dose [ 23 ].…”

“…This is a problem as the category of wound determines the appropriate treatment [ 17 ]. In contrast, a study conducted in North India found that 50% of service providers had knowledge about the correct categorization of animal bite wounds [ 23 ].…”

A cross-sectional study on knowledge of epidemiological determinants, prevention and management of rabies among MBBS interns of a tertiary health care center of central India

“…4,9,12 Also, the majority (84%) could correctly classify category III bite which was lower than the findings of Giri et al (88.1%) but higher than the findings of Sarkar et al (57%) and Shashikantha et al (72%). 4,9,12 Only 26.5% knew the correct management of Cat I animal bite which was higher than the findings of Chowdhury et al (10%). 6 The majority (74.5%) knew the correct management of Cat II animal bite which was higher than the findings of Chowdhury et al (57.5%) and 89% knew the correct management of Cat III animal bite which was near the findings of Chowdhury et al (85%).…”

“…8,11 The majority (87%) could correctly classify category I bite which was higher than the findings of Giri et al (77.6%), Sarkar et al (67%), and Shashikantha et al (62%). 4,9,12 Similarly, the majority (86%) could correctly classify category II bite which was higher than the findings of and Giri et al (81.6%), Sarkar et al (19%) and Shashikantha et al (66%). 4,9,12 Also, the majority (84%) could correctly classify category III bite which was lower than the findings of Giri et al (88.1%) but higher than the findings of Sarkar et al (57%) and Shashikantha et al (72%).…”

“…4,9,12 Similarly, the majority (86%) could correctly classify category II bite which was higher than the findings of and Giri et al (81.6%), Sarkar et al (19%) and Shashikantha et al (66%). 4,9,12 Also, the majority (84%) could correctly classify category III bite which was lower than the findings of Giri et al (88.1%) but higher than the findings of Sarkar et al (57%) and Shashikantha et al (72%). 4,9,12 Only 26.5% knew the correct management of Cat I animal bite which was higher than the findings of Chowdhury et al (10%).…”