Search

Like other neglected diseases, surveillance data for rabies is insufficient and incompatible with the need to accurately describe the burden of disease. Multiple modeling studies central to estimating global human rabies deaths have been conducted in the last two decades, with results ranging from 14,000 to 74,000 deaths annually. Yet, uncertainty in model parameters, inconsistency in modeling approaches, and discrepancies in data quality per country included in global burden studies have led to recent skepticism about the magnitude of rabies mortality. Lack of data not only limits the efficiency and monitoring of rabies elimination strategies but also severely diminishes abilities to advocate for support from international funding agencies. Meanwhile, the most vulnerable communities continue to suffer from deaths that could have been prevented through more robust reporting. The Zero by 30 global strategy to eliminate dog-mediated human rabies by 2030 recommends endemic countries adopt the intersectoral approach, Integrated Bite Case Management (IBCM), as a cost-effective method to enhance surveillance. However, effective implementation of IBCM is impeded by challenges such as limited capacity, resources, knowledge, skills, and attitudes toward compliance. To address this, the World Health Organization and United Against Rabies Forum have developed several open-access tools to guide national control programs in strong data collection practices, and online data repositories to pragmatically streamline reporting and encourage data sharing. Here, we discuss how current and future initiatives can be best employed to improve the implementation of existing surveillance tools and prioritization of effective data reporting/sharing to optimize progress toward 2030 elimination.

BackgroundIntegrated bite case management (IBCM) is a multi-sectoral response to animal-bites which reduces human and canine rabies mortality through animal quarantine, bite-victim counseling, and vaccination tracking. Haiti's national rabies surveillance program was established in 2013 using paper-based IBCM (pIBCM) with adoption of an electronic smartphone application (eIBCM) in 2018.MethodsWe evaluated the feasibility of implementing the electronic app in Haiti and compared pIBCM and eIBCM data quality collected January 2013–August 2019. Deaths prevented, cost-per-death averted, and cost-per-investigation during use of pIBCM and eIBCM were estimated using a previously validated rabies cost-effectiveness tool that accounted for bite-victim demographics; probability of acquiring rabies; post-exposure prophylaxis; and costs including training, supplies, and salaries. We compared pIBCM and eIBCM based on data comprehensiveness, completeness, and reporting efficiency. Surveys were administered to IBCM staff to evaluate the usefulness, simplicity, flexibility, and acceptability of eIBCM.ResultsOf 15,526 investigations, 79% were paper-based and 21% electronic. IBCM prevented 241 (estimated) human rabies deaths. Using pIBCM, cost-per-death averted was $2,692 and the cost-per-investigation was $21.02; up to 55 data variables were collected per investigation; data transmission took 26 days to reach national staff, and 180 days until analysis. Using eIBCM, the cost-per-death averted was $1,247 and the cost-per-investigation was $22.70; up to 174 data variables were collected per investigation; data transmission took 3 days to reach national staff, and 30 days until analysis. Among 12,194 pIBCM investigations, 55% were mappable by commune, compared to 100% of eIBCM investigations mappable by GPS. Animal case definitions were incorrectly ascribed by investigators in 5.5% of pIBCM investigations and zero for eIBCM; typically, errors were in determining probable vs. suspect case assignments. Overall, eIBCM was well-accepted by staff, who reported the app is easy-to-use, facilitates investigations, and compared to pIBCM hastens data reporting.DiscussionIn Haiti, eIBCM showed improved data completeness, data quality, and shorter notification times with minimal increase in operational cost. The electronic app is simple-to-use and facilitates IBCM investigations. Rabies endemic countries could refer to eIBCM in Haiti as a cost-effective means to reduce human rabies mortality and improve surveillance capacity.

Rabies surveillance and control measures vary significantly between Caribbean islands. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention currently recommends certain groups of U.S. travelers to any Caribbean island receive pre-exposure rabies immunization. However, most islands self-declare as “rabies free”, and have never publicly released data to support rabies-free claims. We used the Analytic Hierarchy Process to create pairwise comparison values among five risk factors determined by subject matter experts. Risk factor weights were calculated and used in a geospatial analysis to calculate a risk value for each island nation (higher values indicate higher risk). Risk values ranged from 8.73 (Trinidad) to 1.57 (The Bahamas, Turks and Caicos Islands). All four countries that have documented occurrences of laboratory confirmed rabid bats were ranked highest (Trinidad and Tobago, Grenada, Cuba, Dominican Republic), as well as Haiti. The top five highest risk countries that currently have no reports of bat rabies include St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Jamaica, Puerto Rico, the Cayman Islands, and Dominica. This study reviews the inter-island movement potential of bats, designates areas of high risk for bat-associated rabies within the Caribbean islands, and demonstrates a need for further surveillance efforts in bat populations within islands that self-declare as rabies free.

Background: In canine rabies endemic countries the World Health Organization recommends post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) be initiated immediately after exposure to an animal suspected to have rabies. Limited capacity in low and middle income countries to assess biting animals for rabies may result in the over prescription of rabies biologics. Few guidelines exist to determine the risk of whether a dog that has bitten someone is rabid. Given PEP cost and access limitations in many countries, accurate and timely assessment of dogs that have bitten people may reduce unwarranted PEP use and improve healthcare seeking behaviors. Methods: Haiti’s animal rabies surveillance program utilizes veterinary professionals to conduct rabies assessments on reported biting dogs and records characteristics of the dog, health outcomes, and laboratory results in a national database. Characteristics of rabid dogs were assessed through a retrospective cohort study of biting dogs investigated during the period from January 2013–December 2015. 1409 biting dogs were analyzed; 1361 dogs that were determined to not have rabies were compared to 48 laboratory-confirmed rabid dogs. Rate ratios, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, negative predictive values, likelihood ratios, quarantine survival of biting dogs, and a risk matrix were developed. Findings: The assessor’s determination that the animal likely had rabies was the most significant predictive factor for a rabid dog (RR = 413.4, 95% CI 57.33–2985, Sn = 79.17, Sp = 91.92). Clinical factors significantly associated with rabid dogs included hypersalivation, paralysis, and lethargy (RR = 31.2, 19.7, 15.4, respectively). Rabid dogs were 23.2 times more likely to be found dead at the time of the investigation compared to case negative dogs (95% CI 14.0–38.6). Rabid dogs were also significantly more likely to lack a history of rabies vaccination or be unowned (RR = 10.3 95% CI 2.5–42.3 and RR = 4.5 95% CI 2.0–10.1, respectively). Rabid dogs were four times more likely to have bitten multiple people (RR = 4.0 95% CI 1.9–8.3). Most rabid dogs died or were killed before quarantine (75%) and all died by day 3 of quarantine, compared to