Evaluating Surveillance for and Estimating Administration of Rabies Postexposure Prophylaxis in the United States, 2012–2018

• Main Authors: Erin R. Whitehouse, Marissa K. Person, Catherine M. Brown, Sally Slavinski, Agam K. Rao, Jesse D. Blanton
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
• Subjects: Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine; RC955-962; Public aspects of medicine; RA1-1270; Arctic
• Online Access: https://doaj.org/article/5b53163bd25d47cb862a48b2acc39718

Background An evaluation of postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) surveillance has not been conducted in over 10 years in the United States. An accurate assessment would be important to understand current rabies trends and inform public health preparedness and response to human rabies. Methodology/Principle findings To understand PEP surveillance, we sent a survey to public health leads for rabies in 50 U.S. states, Puerto Rico, Washington DC, Philadelphia, and New York City. Of leads from 54 jurisdictions, 39 (72%) responded to the survey; 12 reported having PEP-specific surveillance, five had animal bite surveillance that included data about PEP, four had animal bite surveillance without data about PEP, and 18 (46%) had neither. Although 12 jurisdictions provided data about PEP use, poor data quality and lack of national representativeness prevented use of this data to derive a national-level PEP estimate. We used national-level and state specific data from the Healthcare Cost & Utilization Project (HCUP) to estimate the number of people who received PEP based on emergency department (ED) visits. The estimated annual average of initial ED visits for PEP administration during 2012–2017 in the United States was 46,814 (SE: 1,697), costing upwards of 165 million USD. State-level ED data for initial visits for administration of PEP for rabies exposure using HCUP data was compared to state-level surveillance data from Maryland, Vermont, and Georgia between 2012–2017. In all states, state-level surveillance data was consistently lower than estimates of initial ED visits, suggesting even states with robust PEP surveillance may not adequately capture individuals who receive PEP. Conclusions Our findings suggest that making PEP a nationally reportable condition may not be feasible. Other methods of tracking administration of PEP such as syndromic surveillance or identification of sentinel states should be considered to obtain an accurate assessment. Author summary Although rabies is nearly always fatal, it is also almost ...