Potential Exposures to Australian Bat Lyssavirus Notified in Queensland, Australia, 2009-2014.

• Published in: PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
• Main Authors: Damin Si, John Marquess, Ellen Donnan, Bruce Harrower, Bradley McCall, Sonya Bennett, Stephen Lambert
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2016
• Subjects: Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine; RC955-962; Public aspects of medicine; RA1-1270; Arctic; Queensland
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005227; https://doaj.org/article/5181ea2be9884f6bb62f125fa3a799f3

BACKGROUND:Australian bat lyssavirus (ABLV) belongs to the genus Lyssavirus which also includes classic rabies virus and the European lyssaviruses. To date, the only three known human ABLV cases, all fatal, have been reported from Queensland, Australia. ABLV is widely distributed in Australian bats, and any bite or scratch from an Australian bat is considered a potential exposure to ABLV. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Potential exposure to ABLV has been a notifiable condition in Queensland since 2005. We analysed notification data for potential exposures occurring between 2009 and 2014. There were 1,515 potential exposures to ABLV notified in Queensland, with an average annual notification rate of 5.6 per 100,000 population per year. The majority of notified individuals (96%) were potentially exposed to ABLV via bats, with a small number of cases potentially exposed via two ABLV infected horses and an ABLV infected human. The most common routes of potential exposure were through bat scratches (47%) or bites (37%), with less common routes being mucous membrane/broken skin exposure to bat saliva/brain tissue (2.2%). Intentional handling of bats by the general public was the major cause of potential exposures (56% of notifications). Examples of these potential exposures included people attempting to rescue bats caught in barbed wire fences/fruit tree netting, or attempting to remove bats from a home. Following potential exposures, 1,399 cases (92%) were recorded as having appropriate post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) as defined in national guidelines, with the remainder having documentation of refusal or incomplete PEP. Up to a quarter of notifications occurred after two days from the potential exposure, but with some delays being more than three weeks. Of 393 bats available for testing during the reporting period, 20 (5.1%) had ABLV detected, including four species of megabats (all flying foxes) and one species of microbats (yellow-bellied sheathtail bat). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE:Public health strategies should ...