Dog and Cat Bites: Epidemiologic Analyses Suggest Different Prevention Strategies
Objective: To examine the characteristics of reported dog and cat bite incidents in El Paso, Texas, and their implications for local bite prevention programs. Methods: The authors reviewed a random sample of reported dog bites and all reported cat bites in El Paso, Texas, in 1995 using existing anim...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Public health reports (1974) 1998-05, Vol.113 (3), p.252-257 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 257 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 252 |
| container_title | Public health reports (1974) |
| container_volume | 113 |
| creator | Patrick, Gail R. Kathleen M. O'Rourke |
| description | Objective: To examine the characteristics of reported dog and cat bite incidents in El Paso, Texas, and their implications for local bite prevention programs. Methods: The authors reviewed a random sample of reported dog bites and all reported cat bites in El Paso, Texas, in 1995 using existing animal control surveillance data. Results: The majority of cat bites (89.4%) were provoked, with females (57.5%) and adults (68.3%) more likely to be victims than males or children. In contrast, just under half of dog bites (44.6%) were provoked, with males (65.6%) and children (63%) more likely to be victims than females or adults. Dogs that had not been vaccinated for rabies were involved in 65% of dog bites and cats that had not been vaccinated for rabies were involved in 92% of cat bites. Conclusion: Effective bite prevention programs should address the finding that both restrained and unrestrained dogs may bite even when unprovoked and that unrestrained cats usually bite when provoked. |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1308678</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>4598260</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>4598260</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-j338t-81a996ad7c161cc98f03074f6f565f28d1fa70ae372a03fbd152c65f1531656e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkN1LwzAUxYsoc07_A4Ugvhby0XzUB2Fu8wMGKtPnkrVJTemamaSD_fdGLEPvy334Hc655x4lY5QxkWLB-XEyhpCQlNAsP03OvG9gHIzIKBnljBDB8Th5m9sayK4CMxnAvQnK34LF1lRqY2xra1OCaSfbvVcerPq6Vj6AudFaOdUF8OrULm5jO7AKTgZVG-XPkxMtW68uhj1JPh4W77OndPny-DybLtMmRodUIJnnTFa8RAyVZS40JJBnmmnKqMaiQlpyKBXhWEKi1xWiuIwEUYIYZYpMkrtf322_3qiqjIc42RZbZzbS7QsrTfGfdOazqO2uQAQKxkU0uB4MnP3qY7Oisb2LbX2BCUQUccyj6OpvysF-eGDkNwOXvpStdrIrjT_IMM6oQD9Zl7-yxgfrDjijucAMkm_HXIPd</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>230151727</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Dog and Cat Bites: Epidemiologic Analyses Suggest Different Prevention Strategies</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Patrick, Gail R. ; Kathleen M. O'Rourke</creator><creatorcontrib>Patrick, Gail R. ; Kathleen M. O'Rourke</creatorcontrib><description>Objective: To examine the characteristics of reported dog and cat bite incidents in El Paso, Texas, and their implications for local bite prevention programs. Methods: The authors reviewed a random sample of reported dog bites and all reported cat bites in El Paso, Texas, in 1995 using existing animal control surveillance data. Results: The majority of cat bites (89.4%) were provoked, with females (57.5%) and adults (68.3%) more likely to be victims than males or children. In contrast, just under half of dog bites (44.6%) were provoked, with males (65.6%) and children (63%) more likely to be victims than females or adults. Dogs that had not been vaccinated for rabies were involved in 65% of dog bites and cats that had not been vaccinated for rabies were involved in 92% of cat bites. Conclusion: Effective bite prevention programs should address the finding that both restrained and unrestrained dogs may bite even when unprovoked and that unrestrained cats usually bite when provoked.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0033-3549</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-2877</identifier><identifier>PMID: 9633872</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PHRPA6</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington, DC: U.S. Public Health Service</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Age Distribution ; Aged ; Animal bites ; Animals ; Biological and medical sciences ; Bites and Stings - epidemiology ; Bites and Stings - etiology ; Bites and Stings - prevention & control ; Cats ; Chi-Square Distribution ; Child ; Child, Preschool ; Children ; Dogs ; Epidemiology ; Female ; Humans ; Incidence ; Infant ; Infant, Newborn ; Male ; Male animals ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Miscellaneous ; Pets ; Prevention ; Public health ; Rabies ; Random Allocation ; Sex Distribution ; Sheep herding ; Texas - epidemiology ; Traumas. Diseases due to physical agents ; Urban Population - statistics & numerical data</subject><ispartof>Public health reports (1974), 1998-05, Vol.113 (3), p.252-257</ispartof><rights>1998 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Superintendent of Documents May/Jun 1998</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/4598260$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/4598260$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,803,885,53791,53793,58017,58250</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=2245818$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9633872$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Patrick, Gail R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kathleen M. O'Rourke</creatorcontrib><title>Dog and Cat Bites: Epidemiologic Analyses Suggest Different Prevention Strategies</title><title>Public health reports (1974)</title><addtitle>Public Health Rep</addtitle><description>Objective: To examine the characteristics of reported dog and cat bite incidents in El Paso, Texas, and their implications for local bite prevention programs. Methods: The authors reviewed a random sample of reported dog bites and all reported cat bites in El Paso, Texas, in 1995 using existing animal control surveillance data. Results: The majority of cat bites (89.4%) were provoked, with females (57.5%) and adults (68.3%) more likely to be victims than males or children. In contrast, just under half of dog bites (44.6%) were provoked, with males (65.6%) and children (63%) more likely to be victims than females or adults. Dogs that had not been vaccinated for rabies were involved in 65% of dog bites and cats that had not been vaccinated for rabies were involved in 92% of cat bites. Conclusion: Effective bite prevention programs should address the finding that both restrained and unrestrained dogs may bite even when unprovoked and that unrestrained cats usually bite when provoked.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Age Distribution</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Animal bites</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Bites and Stings - epidemiology</subject><subject>Bites and Stings - etiology</subject><subject>Bites and Stings - prevention & control</subject><subject>Cats</subject><subject>Chi-Square Distribution</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Child, Preschool</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Dogs</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Incidence</subject><subject>Infant</subject><subject>Infant, Newborn</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Male animals</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Pets</subject><subject>Prevention</subject><subject>Public health</subject><subject>Rabies</subject><subject>Random Allocation</subject><subject>Sex Distribution</subject><subject>Sheep herding</subject><subject>Texas - epidemiology</subject><subject>Traumas. Diseases due to physical agents</subject><subject>Urban Population - statistics & numerical data</subject><issn>0033-3549</issn><issn>1468-2877</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1998</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkN1LwzAUxYsoc07_A4Ugvhby0XzUB2Fu8wMGKtPnkrVJTemamaSD_fdGLEPvy334Hc655x4lY5QxkWLB-XEyhpCQlNAsP03OvG9gHIzIKBnljBDB8Th5m9sayK4CMxnAvQnK34LF1lRqY2xra1OCaSfbvVcerPq6Vj6AudFaOdUF8OrULm5jO7AKTgZVG-XPkxMtW68uhj1JPh4W77OndPny-DybLtMmRodUIJnnTFa8RAyVZS40JJBnmmnKqMaiQlpyKBXhWEKi1xWiuIwEUYIYZYpMkrtf322_3qiqjIc42RZbZzbS7QsrTfGfdOazqO2uQAQKxkU0uB4MnP3qY7Oisb2LbX2BCUQUccyj6OpvysF-eGDkNwOXvpStdrIrjT_IMM6oQD9Zl7-yxgfrDjijucAMkm_HXIPd</recordid><startdate>19980501</startdate><enddate>19980501</enddate><creator>Patrick, Gail R.</creator><creator>Kathleen M. O'Rourke</creator><general>U.S. Public Health Service</general><general>Association of Schools of Public Health</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19980501</creationdate><title>Dog and Cat Bites: Epidemiologic Analyses Suggest Different Prevention Strategies</title><author>Patrick, Gail R. ; Kathleen M. O'Rourke</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-j338t-81a996ad7c161cc98f03074f6f565f28d1fa70ae372a03fbd152c65f1531656e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1998</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Age Distribution</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Animal bites</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Bites and Stings - epidemiology</topic><topic>Bites and Stings - etiology</topic><topic>Bites and Stings - prevention & control</topic><topic>Cats</topic><topic>Chi-Square Distribution</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Child, Preschool</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Dogs</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Incidence</topic><topic>Infant</topic><topic>Infant, Newborn</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Male animals</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Pets</topic><topic>Prevention</topic><topic>Public health</topic><topic>Rabies</topic><topic>Random Allocation</topic><topic>Sex Distribution</topic><topic>Sheep herding</topic><topic>Texas - epidemiology</topic><topic>Traumas. Diseases due to physical agents</topic><topic>Urban Population - statistics & numerical data</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Patrick, Gail R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kathleen M. O'Rourke</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Public health reports (1974)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Patrick, Gail R.</au><au>Kathleen M. O'Rourke</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Dog and Cat Bites: Epidemiologic Analyses Suggest Different Prevention Strategies</atitle><jtitle>Public health reports (1974)</jtitle><addtitle>Public Health Rep</addtitle><date>1998-05-01</date><risdate>1998</risdate><volume>113</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>252</spage><epage>257</epage><pages>252-257</pages><issn>0033-3549</issn><eissn>1468-2877</eissn><coden>PHRPA6</coden><abstract>Objective: To examine the characteristics of reported dog and cat bite incidents in El Paso, Texas, and their implications for local bite prevention programs. Methods: The authors reviewed a random sample of reported dog bites and all reported cat bites in El Paso, Texas, in 1995 using existing animal control surveillance data. Results: The majority of cat bites (89.4%) were provoked, with females (57.5%) and adults (68.3%) more likely to be victims than males or children. In contrast, just under half of dog bites (44.6%) were provoked, with males (65.6%) and children (63%) more likely to be victims than females or adults. Dogs that had not been vaccinated for rabies were involved in 65% of dog bites and cats that had not been vaccinated for rabies were involved in 92% of cat bites. Conclusion: Effective bite prevention programs should address the finding that both restrained and unrestrained dogs may bite even when unprovoked and that unrestrained cats usually bite when provoked.</abstract><cop>Washington, DC</cop><pub>U.S. Public Health Service</pub><pmid>9633872</pmid><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0033-3549 |
| ispartof | Public health reports (1974), 1998-05, Vol.113 (3), p.252-257 |
| issn | 0033-3549 1468-2877 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1308678 |
| source | MEDLINE; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Adolescent Adult Age Distribution Aged Animal bites Animals Biological and medical sciences Bites and Stings - epidemiology Bites and Stings - etiology Bites and Stings - prevention & control Cats Chi-Square Distribution Child Child, Preschool Children Dogs Epidemiology Female Humans Incidence Infant Infant, Newborn Male Male animals Medical sciences Middle Aged Miscellaneous Pets Prevention Public health Rabies Random Allocation Sex Distribution Sheep herding Texas - epidemiology Traumas. Diseases due to physical agents Urban Population - statistics & numerical data |
| title | Dog and Cat Bites: Epidemiologic Analyses Suggest Different Prevention Strategies |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T20%3A57%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Dog%20and%20Cat%20Bites:%20Epidemiologic%20Analyses%20Suggest%20Different%20Prevention%20Strategies&rft.jtitle=Public%20health%20reports%20(1974)&rft.au=Patrick,%20Gail%20R.&rft.date=1998-05-01&rft.volume=113&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=252&rft.epage=257&rft.pages=252-257&rft.issn=0033-3549&rft.eissn=1468-2877&rft.coden=PHRPA6&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pubme%3E4598260%3C/jstor_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=230151727&rft_id=info:pmid/9633872&rft_jstor_id=4598260&rfr_iscdi=true |