Taylor Tegwin K, Radcliffe Rachel A, Bixler Danae
Epidemic Intelligence Service, Scientific Education and Professional Development Program Office, CDC, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA.
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2013 Jul 1;243(1):63-7. doi: 10.2460/javma.243.1.63.
To assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding rabies preexposure prophylaxis among veterinary facility owners in West Virginia and to compare facilities in counties where raccoon rabies virus variant (RRVV) is or is not enzootic.
Cross-sectional telephone survey.
124 owners of facilities licensed by the West Virginia Board of Veterinary Medicine.
In 2011, an owner of each licensed facility in West Virginia was contacted by telephone to complete a questionnaire regarding practice demographics, knowledge of rabies epidemiology, and preexposure prophylaxis policies. Data from facilities in counties where RRVV is enzootic were compared with data from facilities in counties where RRVV is not enzootic. Prevalence ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to quantify the strength of associations.
Owners of 124 of the 162 (77%) veterinary facilities participated in the survey. West Virginia veterinarians were knowledgeable of rabies epidemiology in the state. Respondents agreed that veterinarians (122/124 [98%]) and technicians and assistants (111/124 [90%]) should receive preexposure prophylaxis. Fifty-six (45%) respondents required that veterinarians receive preexposure prophylaxis, whereas 19 (15%) respondents required that technicians and assistants receive preexposure prophylaxis. A preexposure prophylaxis policy was in effect at 20 of 64 (31%) facilities in counties where RRVV is enzootic and 6 of 60 (10%) facilities in counties where RRVV is not enzootic. Concerns related to cost of preexposure prophylaxis were reported.
Except for veterinarians, veterinary staff in West Virginia did not commonly receive preexposure prophylaxis or regular assessments of serum rabies virus neutralizing antibody titers. All veterinary practices are encouraged to consider revising or implementing a preexposure prophylaxis policy based on the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' recommendations.
评估西弗吉尼亚州兽医机构所有者关于狂犬病暴露前预防的知识、态度和做法，并比较浣熊狂犬病病毒变种（RRVV）呈或未呈地方流行的县的机构情况。
横断面电话调查。
124名获得西弗吉尼亚州兽医医学委员会许可的机构所有者。
2011年，通过电话联系西弗吉尼亚州每个获得许可的机构的所有者，以完成一份关于机构人口统计学、狂犬病流行病学知识和暴露前预防政策的问卷。将RRVV呈地方流行的县的机构数据与RRVV未呈地方流行的县的机构数据进行比较。计算患病率比和95%置信区间以量化关联强度。
162家兽医机构中的124家（77%）的所有者参与了调查。西弗吉尼亚州的兽医了解该州的狂犬病流行病学情况。受访者一致认为兽医（122/124 [98%]）以及技术人员和助手（111/124 [90%]）应接受暴露前预防。56名（45%）受访者要求兽医接受暴露前预防，而19名（15%）受访者要求技术人员和助手接受暴露前预防。在RRVV呈地方流行的县的64家机构中的20家（31%）以及RRVV未呈地方流行的县的60家机构中的6家（10%）实施了暴露前预防政策。报告了与暴露前预防成本相关的担忧。
除兽医外，西弗吉尼亚州的兽医工作人员通常未接受暴露前预防或血清狂犬病病毒中和抗体滴度的定期评估。鼓励所有兽医业务机构根据免疫实践咨询委员会的建议考虑修订或实施暴露前预防政策。
