SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Düzce Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Volume: 15 Issue: 1

The Comparison of Post-exposure Prophylaxis Recommended by World Health Organization with the Application of the Prophylaxis after Rabies Suspected Contact in Emergency Service

Acil Serviste Uygulanan Kuduz Şüpheli Temas Sonrası Profilaksi ile Dünya Sağlık Örgütü’nün Önerdiği Profilaksi Uygulamasının Karşılaştırılması

Hasan Büyükaslan(Sağlık Bakanlığı Şanlıurfa Balıklıgöl Devlet Hastanesi Acil Kliniği, Şanlıurfa-Türkiye)
Mustafa İçer(Dicle Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Acil Tıp Anabilim Dalı, Diyarbakır-Türkiye)
Mustafa Şahan(Sağlık Bakanlığı Elazığ Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Acil Kliniği, ElazığTürkiye)
Umut Gülaçtı(Adıyaman Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Adıyaman-Türkiye)
Pages
—
Publication Date
2013-03-01
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Statistical analysis of data was performed with SPSS 17.0 program.Results: Of 314 cases included to study, 236 (%75.2) were male and 78 (%24.8) were female.It was determined that the most patients who had been exposed to rabies suspected contact werebetween 5-15 age group (p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This study aims put forth the epidemiology of cases with rabies-suspected contactand to evaluate the incompatibility between the prophylaxis applied after the contact in ourcountry and recommended prophylaxis of World Health Organization (WHO).Material and Methods: The patients with rabies suspected contacts who admitted to a secondline hospital’s emergency service between January-November 2010 were retrospectivelyevaluated.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Objective: This study aims put forth the epidemiology of cases with rabies-suspected contactand to evaluate the incompatibility between the prophylaxis applied after the contact in ourcountry and recommended prophylaxis of World Health Organization (WHO).Material and Methods: The patients with rabies suspected contacts who admitted to a secondline hospital’s emergency service between January-November 2010 were retrospectivelyevaluated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Statistical analysis of data was performed with SPSS 17.0 program.Results: Of 314 cases included to study, 236 (%75.2) were male and 78 (%24.8) were female.It was determined that the most patients who had been exposed to rabies suspected contact werebetween 5-15 age group (p
🔬Design:Article
📍Scope:2010 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Rabies · suspected contact · WHO

Abstract

Objective: This study aims put forth the epidemiology of cases with rabies-suspected contactand to evaluate the incompatibility between the prophylaxis applied after the contact in ourcountry and recommended prophylaxis of World Health Organization (WHO).Material and Methods: The patients with rabies suspected contacts who admitted to a secondline hospital’s emergency service between January-November 2010 were retrospectivelyevaluated. Statistical analysis of data was performed with SPSS 17.0 program.Results: Of 314 cases included to study, 236 (%75.2) were male and 78 (%24.8) were female.It was determined that the most patients who had been exposed to rabies suspected contact werebetween 5-15 age group (p

Özet

Amaç: Acil servise başvuran kuduz şüpheli temas vakalarının epidemiyolojisini ortaya koymakve ülkemizde uygulanan kuduz temas profilaksisi ile Dünya Sağlık Örgütü (WHO)’nün tavsiyeettiği profilaksi uygulaması arasındaki uyumsuzlukları irdelemektir.Gereç ve Yöntem: Ocak-Kasım 2010 tarihleri arasında ikinci basamak bir hastanenin acilservisine kuduz şüpheli temas nedeniyle başvuran vakaların dosyaları retrospektif olarakincelendi. Verilerin istatistik analizi SPSS 17,0 programı ile yapıldı.Bulgular: Çalışmaya 78’i (%24,8) kadın, 236’sı (%75,2) erkek 314 hasta dahil edildi.Vakalardan 5-15 yaş grubunda olanlar en fazla kuduz şüpheli temasa maruz kaldıkları saptandı(p

🔖

Cite This Article

Büyükaslan, H., İçer, M., Şahan, M., Gülaçtı, U. (2013). The Comparison of Post-exposure Prophylaxis Recommended by World Health Organization with the Application of the Prophylaxis after Rabies Suspected Contact in Emergency Service. Düzce Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, Volume: 15 Issue: 1. https://doi.org/10.5152/jaem.2011.004.

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (21)

  1. Warrell MJ, Warrell DA: Rabies and other lyssavirus diseases. Lancet 2004, 363(9413):959-69.
  2. Rabies vaccine WHO position paper: WHO Weekly Epidemiological Record 2010, 85(32):309-20.
  3. Temel Sağlık hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü Çalışma yıllığı 2003 Ankara: Sağlık Bakanlığı Yayınları 2004, pp:105.
  4. Safran A. Sağlık Bakanlığı: Mevcut Durum ve Kuduz Hastalığı ile İlgili Yürütülen Çalışmalar. 3. Türkiye Zoonotik Hastalıklar Sempozyumu, Ankara. 2010, pp:80-3.
  5. T.C. Sağlık Bakanlığı Temel Sağlık Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü Kuduz Korunma ve Kontrol Yönergesi 2005. 2. Baskı. Ankara: Sağlık Bakanlığı Yayınları; 2005.
  6. Rabies Fact sheet No 99 Accessed September 28,2011,at http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs099/en/
  7. Yıldız M, Durukan P. Hayvanlara Bağlı Yaralanmalar: Fırat Tıp Derg. 2005, 10(1): 25-6.
  8. Temiz H, Akkoç H: Diyarbakır Devlet Hastanesi Kuduz Aşı Merkezine Başvuran 809 Olgunun Değerlendirilmesi. Dicle Tıp Derg. 2008, 35: 181-4.
  9. Dodet B, Goswami A, Gunasekera A, Guzman de F et al. Rabies Awareness in Eight Countries. Vaccine 2008, 26(50): 6344-8.
  10. Söğüt Ö, Sayhan MB, Gökdemir MT, Kara HP: Türkiye’nin Güneydoğusunda Önlenebilir Bir Halk Sağlığı Sorunu: Kuduz Riskli doi:10.5152/jaem.2011.004.
  11. JAEM.1(10):14-7,2011.
  12. Moran GJ, Talan AD, Mower W, Newdow M: Appropriateness of rabies postexposure prophylaxis treatment for animal exposures. JAMA 2000;284(8):1001-7. doi:10.1001/jama. 284.22.2870-a.
  13. Rabies Epidemiology. Accessed December 28,2011,at http://www.who.int/rabies/epidemiology/eng
  14. Göktaş P, Ceran N, Karagül E, Çiçek G, Özyürek S: Kuduz Aşı Merkezine Başvuran 11,017 Olgunun Değerlendirilmesi. Klimik Derg. 2002, 15:12-5.
  15. Sengoz G, Yaşar KK, Karabela SN, Yildirim F: Evaluation of cases admitted to a center in İstanbul, Turkey in 2003 for rabies vaccination and three rabies cases followed up in the last 15 years. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2006, 59(4): 254-7.
  16. Kamoltham T, Singhsa J, Promsaranee U, Sonthon P, Mathean P, Thinyounyong: Elimination of human rabies in a canine endemic province in Thailand: five-year programme. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 2003, 81(5):375- 81.
  17. Song M, Tang Q, Wang DM, Mo ZJ, Guo SH, Li H, et al: Epidemiology of animal bites and rabies cases in India. A multicentric study. BMC Infect Dis. 2009, 9:210. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-9-210
  18. Gautret P, Shaw M, Gazin P, Soula G, Delmont J, Parola P, et al: Rabies postexposure prophylaxis in returned injured travelers from France, Australia, and New Zealand: a retrospective study. J Travel Med. 2008, 15(1):25-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8305.2007.00164.x
  19. Chhabra M, Ichhpujani RL, Tewari KN, Lal S: Human rabies in Delhi. Indian J Pediatr. 2004, 71(3):217-20.
  20. Wilde H, Tipkong P, Khawplod P: Economic issues in postexposure rabies treatment. J Travel Med. 1999, 6(4):238- 42. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8305.1999.tb00525.x
  21. Fishken DB, Bernard KW: Rabies virus. In Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R (eds): Mandell, Douglas and Bennett’s Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases. 4th ed. New York. Churchill Livingstone. 1995, pp:1527-43.