• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Use of rabies postexposure prophylaxis supplied by the Alaska Section of Epidemiology, Alaska, 2002-2007.2002年至2007年阿拉斯加流行病学部门提供的狂犬病暴露后预防措施的使用情况。
Public Health Rep. 2009 Mar-Apr;124(2):262-6. doi: 10.1177/003335490912400214.
2
Human rabies exposures and postexposure prophylaxis in South Carolina, 1993-2002.1993 - 2002年南卡罗来纳州的人类狂犬病暴露情况及暴露后预防措施
Public Health Rep. 2006 Mar-Apr;121(2):197-202. doi: 10.1177/003335490612100215.
3
The first report evaluating the post-exposure rabies prophylaxis in children exposed to animals in the Lublin Province (Eastern Poland) in 2010-2016 - a retrospective study.2010-2016 年波兰东部卢布林省动物暴露后狂犬病预防评估的首份报告-回顾性研究。
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2018;14(11):2660-2665. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2018.1477910. Epub 2018 Jun 28.
4
A retrospective evaluation of bites at risk of rabies transmission across 7 years: The need to improve surveillance and reporting systems for rabies elimination.7 年间狂犬病传播风险咬伤的回顾性评估:消除狂犬病需改善监测和报告系统。
PLoS One. 2018 Jul 2;13(7):e0197996. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197996. eCollection 2018.
5
Determinants of health seeking behaviour following rabies exposure in Ethiopia.埃塞俄比亚狂犬病暴露后就医行为的决定因素。
Zoonoses Public Health. 2018 Jun;65(4):443-453. doi: 10.1111/zph.12458. Epub 2018 Mar 10.
6
Epidemiology and surveillance of human animal-bite injuries and rabies post-exposure prophylaxis, in selected counties in Kenya, 2011-2016.肯尼亚部分县 2011-2016 年人间动物咬伤和狂犬病暴露后预防的流行病学和监测。
BMC Public Health. 2018 Aug 9;18(1):996. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5888-5.
7
Surveillance of Rabies Postexposure Prophylaxis in Greece: 4 Years Experience.希腊狂犬病暴露后预防的监测:4 年经验。
Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2019 Apr;19(4):295-301. doi: 10.1089/vbz.2018.2344. Epub 2018 Sep 22.
8
Epidemiological characteristics and post-exposure prophylaxis of human rabies in Chongqing, China, 2007-2016.2007 - 2016年中国重庆地区人狂犬病的流行病学特征及暴露后预防
BMC Infect Dis. 2018 Jan 3;18(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s12879-017-2830-x.
9
Evaluation of state-provided postexposure prophylaxis against rabies in Florida.佛罗里达州政府提供的狂犬病暴露后预防措施评估。
South Med J. 2002 Feb;95(2):225-30.
10
[Rabies].[狂犬病]
Nihon Naika Gakkai Zasshi. 2004 Nov 10;93(11):2382-7. doi: 10.2169/naika.93.2382.

引用本文的文献

1
Rabies management structures and challenges in the North in a One Health framework.在大健康框架下,北方的狂犬病管理结构和挑战。
Int J Circumpolar Health. 2024 Dec;83(1):2318059. doi: 10.1080/22423982.2024.2318059. Epub 2024 Feb 18.
2
Rabies in Alaska, from the past to an uncertain future.阿拉斯加的狂犬病:从过去到不确定的未来
Int J Circumpolar Health. 2018 Dec;77(1):1475185. doi: 10.1080/22423982.2018.1475185.

本文引用的文献

1
Rabies in a puppy imported from India to the USA, March 2007.2007年3月,一只从印度进口到美国的幼犬感染狂犬病。
Zoonoses Public Health. 2008 Oct;55(8-10):427-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1863-2378.2008.01107.x.
2
Human rabies prevention--United States, 2008: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.2008年美国人类狂犬病预防——免疫实践咨询委员会的建议
MMWR Recomm Rep. 2008 May 23;57(RR-3):1-28.
3
Rabies surveillance in the United States during 2006.2006年美国的狂犬病监测
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2007 Aug 15;231(4):540-56. doi: 10.2460/javma.231.4.540.
4
Direct and indirect costs of rabies exposure: a retrospective study in southern California (1998-2002).狂犬病暴露的直接和间接成本:南加州的一项回顾性研究(1998 - 2002年)
J Wildl Dis. 2007 Apr;43(2):251-7. doi: 10.7589/0090-3558-43.2.251.
5
Human rabies exposures and postexposure prophylaxis in South Carolina, 1993-2002.1993 - 2002年南卡罗来纳州的人类狂犬病暴露情况及暴露后预防措施
Public Health Rep. 2006 Mar-Apr;121(2):197-202. doi: 10.1177/003335490612100215.
6
Rabies postexposure prophylaxis, New York, 1995-2000.纽约1995 - 2000年狂犬病暴露后预防处理
Emerg Infect Dis. 2005 Dec;11(12):1921-7. doi: 10.3201/eid1112.041278.
7
Evaluation of state-provided postexposure prophylaxis against rabies in Florida.佛罗里达州政府提供的狂犬病暴露后预防措施评估。
South Med J. 2002 Feb;95(2):225-30.
8
Animal bite epidemiology and surveillance for rabies postexposure prophylaxis.动物咬伤流行病学及狂犬病暴露后预防监测。
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2000 Jul 15;217(2):190-4. doi: 10.2460/javma.2000.217.190.
9
Human rabies postexposure prophylaxis during a raccoon rabies epizootic in New York, 1993 and 1994.1993年和1994年纽约浣熊狂犬病流行期间的人类狂犬病暴露后预防
Emerg Infect Dis. 1999 May-Jun;5(3):415-23. doi: 10.3201/eid0503.990312.
10
Causes, costs, and estimates of rabies postexposure prophylaxis treatments in the United States.美国狂犬病暴露后预防治疗的病因、成本及估算
J Public Health Manag Pract. 1998 Sep;4(5):56-62. doi: 10.1097/00124784-199809000-00009.

2002年至2007年阿拉斯加流行病学部门提供的狂犬病暴露后预防措施的使用情况。

Use of rabies postexposure prophylaxis supplied by the Alaska Section of Epidemiology, Alaska, 2002-2007.

作者信息

Castrodale Louisa

机构信息

Alaska Section of Epidemiology, Anchorage, AK 99503, USA.

出版信息

Public Health Rep. 2009 Mar-Apr;124(2):262-6. doi: 10.1177/003335490912400214.

DOI:10.1177/003335490912400214
PMID:19320368
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2646483/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to summarize the Alaska experience in centralizing distribution of rabies postexposure prophylaxis (PEP).

METHODS

Data were collected from standard treatment sheets used to track doses and notes related to the exposure investigations.

RESULTS

From 2002 to 2007, the annual PEP usage rate was 2.2 per 100,000. Dogs were involved in 79% (68/86) of exposures. More than 50% (49/87) of people were exposed to a confirmed rabid animal; 31 (63%) of those people experienced nonbite exposures. Conversely, of the remaining 38 people exposed to an animal for which rabies status could not be confirmed, 35 (92%) sustained a bite or puncture. Direct and indirect costs averaged more than $3000 per person.

CONCLUSIONS

The Alaska PEP usage rate was lower and the proportion of people exposed to confirmed rabid animals was higher when compared with other states. Alaska public health personnel invested significant time to ensure that PEP was only given when indicated. Without this gatekeeper approach, PEP would likely be administered at a much higher rate because medical facility staff lacks the time or ability to investigate animal exposures to rule out rabies. In Alaska, centralizing rabies PEP not only serves the patient's best interest, but it also makes efficient use of a potentially scarce product and supports rabies surveillance efforts by guaranteeing animals for testing. Such a program might not be feasible for a more populous state or jurisdiction, or areas with different rabies epizootiology; however, that may change if the supply of rabies biologics changes in the future.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在总结阿拉斯加在集中分发狂犬病暴露后预防(PEP)方面的经验。

方法

从用于追踪剂量及与暴露调查相关记录的标准治疗表中收集数据。

结果

2002年至2007年,PEP的年使用率为每10万人2.2例。79%(68/86)的暴露事件涉及犬类。超过50%(49/87)的人接触过确诊患有狂犬病的动物;其中31人(63%)经历了非咬伤暴露。相反,在其余38名接触过狂犬病状态无法确认的动物的人中,35人(92%)遭受了咬伤或刺伤。直接和间接成本平均每人超过3000美元。

结论

与其他州相比,阿拉斯加的PEP使用率较低,而接触确诊患有狂犬病动物的人群比例较高。阿拉斯加的公共卫生人员投入了大量时间,以确保仅在有指征时才给予PEP。如果没有这种把关方法,PEP的给药率可能会高得多,因为医疗机构工作人员没有时间或能力调查动物暴露情况以排除狂犬病。在阿拉斯加,集中管理狂犬病PEP不仅符合患者的最大利益,还能有效利用可能稀缺的产品,并通过保证提供用于检测的动物来支持狂犬病监测工作。这样的项目对于人口更多的州或管辖区,或狂犬病流行情况不同的地区可能不可行;然而,如果未来狂犬病生物制品的供应发生变化,情况可能会有所改变。