Snakebites in the Municipality of Tarauacá, Acre, Western Brazilian Amazon
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.157760Keywords:
ophidism, snakes, envenomations, venomous animals, epidemiologyAbstract
Introduction: Snakebites are a public health problem and are considered a common clinical emergency in several tropical countries, especially in rural and forested regions where these animals are more frequent. It is estimated that approximately 28,800 cases of snakebites per year occur in Brazil, with an average of 119 deaths, in which the north region has the highest rate of incidence. However, the accuracy of these data ends up being brought into question, since there are undoubtedly many cases of under-reporting and even cases that are not reported at all, due to logistical and geographical reasons or due to a lack of preparation as to the precise identification of the problem.
Objective: This study aimed to describe the epidemiological characteristics of the reported cases of snakebites victims in the municipality of Tarauacá (Acre), comparing the morbidity coefficient with other Amazonian regions, and to observe possible factors associated with the appearance of complications in these cases.
Methods: This is a retrospective descriptive study through the analysis of the clinical-epidemiological information found on the notification sheets of the Information System of Notification Diseases of victims of snakebites that occurred during the period between 2012 and 2016 in Tarauacá.
Results: We recorded 96 snakebite cases during the study period, with the majority (95.8%) classified as botropic, followed by laquetics (3.2%) and one by a non-venomous snake (1%). No deaths were recorded. Snakebites were more frequent in rural areas (87.5%), most being an occupational accident, and affected mainly adult male individuals in their lower limbs. Most cases occurred during the rainy season and had a positive correlation with rainfall.
Conclusions: The morbidity coefficient registered in Tarauacá in 2016 (72.5 cases per 100,000 inhabitants) was higher than that recorded in the cities of Cruzeiro do Sul and Rio Branco and in the states of Acre and Amazonas. Although most patients receive antivenom within the first six hours, many victims do not receive appropriate hospital care until more than 24 hours after the envenoming, which is a factor associated with the appearance of complications.
Downloads
References
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JOURNAL PUBLISHERS
Publishers who are Committee on Publication Ethics members and who support COPE membership for journal editors should:
- Follow this code, and encourage the editors they work with to follow the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Edi- tors (http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/New_Code.pdf)
- Ensure the editors and journals they work with are aware of what their membership of COPE provides and en- tails
- Provide reasonable practical support to editors so that they can follow the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors (http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/New_Code.pdf_)
Publishers should:
- Define the relationship between publisher, editor and other parties in a contract
- Respect privacy (for example, for research participants, for authors, for peer reviewers)
- Protect intellectual property and copyright
- Foster editorial independence
Publishers should work with journal editors to:
- Set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies, particularly with respect to:
– Editorial independence
– Research ethics, including confidentiality, consent, and the special requirements for human and animal research
– Authorship
– Transparency and integrity (for example, conflicts of interest, research funding, reporting standards
– Peer review and the role of the editorial team beyond that of the journal editor
– Appeals and complaints
- Communicate journal policies (for example, to authors, readers, peer reviewers)
- Review journal policies periodically, particularly with respect to new recommendations from the COPE
- Code of Conduct for Editors and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines
- Maintain the integrity of the academic record
- Assist the parties (for example, institutions, grant funders, governing bodies) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, facilitate in the resolution of these cases
- Publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions
- Publish content on a timely basis