Volume 8, Number 9—September 2002
Research
Public Health Impact of Reemergence of Rabies, New York
Hwa-Gan H. Chang*
, Millicent Eidson*†, Candace Noonan-Toly*, Charles V. Trimarchi*, Robert Rudd*, Barbara J. Wallace*†, Perry F. Smith*†, and Dale L. Morse*†
, Millicent Eidson*†, Candace Noonan-Toly*, Charles V. Trimarchi*, Robert Rudd*, Barbara J. Wallace*†, Perry F. Smith*†, and Dale L. Morse*†Table 3
Number of humans receiving postexposure treatment, by animal status and type of exposure, New York, 1993–1998
| Type of exposure | No. (%) of humans receiving PET a |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rabid animal | Suspect rabid animalb | Nonrabid animalc | Total | |
| Bite | 538 (.8) | 5,503 (47.6) | 328 (60.0) | 6,369 (34.9) |
| Scratch | 224 (3.6) | 773 (6.7) | 56 (10.2) | 1,053 (5.8) |
| Contact with saliva | 5,090 (82.9) | 2,891 (25.0) | 131 (23.9) | 8,112 (44.5) |
| Unknown exposure | 287 (4.8) | 2,385 (20.6) | 32 (5.9) | 2,704 (14.8) |
| Total | 6,139 (10) | 11,552 (100) | 547 (100) | 18,238 (100) |
aPET, postexposure treatment.
bPETs due to exposure to animals not submitted for rabies testing or specimen was not testable because of specimen condition.
cPETs due to exposure to animals that tested negative for rabies.
