CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 63

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

English hospital episode data analysis (1998–2018) reveal that the rise in dog bite hospital admissions is driven by adult cases

Tulloch, John S. P., Owczarczak-Garstecka, Sara C., Fleming, Kate M., Vivancos, Roberto, Westgarth, Carri·2021·Scientific Reports
DOI 10.1038/s41598-021-81527-7PMC PMC7815787
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Dog bites are a global health issue that can lead to severe health outcomes. This study aims to describe the incidence and sociodemographics of patients admitted to English National Health Service (NHS) hospitals for dog bites (1998–2018), and to estimate their annual direct health care costs. An analysis of patient level data utilising hospital episode statistics for NHS England, including: temporal trends in annual incidence of admission, Poisson models of the sociodemographic characteristics of admitted patients, and direct health care cost estimates. The incidence of dog bite admissions rose from 6.34 (95%CI 6.12–6.56) in 1998 to 14.99 (95%CI 14.67–15.31) admissions per 100,000 population in 2018, with large geographic variation. The increase was driven by a tripling of incidence in adults. Males had the highest rates of admission in childhood. Females had two peaks in admission, childhood and 35–64 years old. Two percent (2.05%, 95%CI 0.93–3.17) of emergency department attendances resulted in admission. Direct health care costs increased and peaked in the financial year 2017/2018 (admission costs: £25.1 million, emergency attendance costs: £45.7million). Dog bite related hospital admissions have increased solely in adults. Further work exploring human–dog interactions, stratified by demographic factors, is urgently needed to enable the development of appropriate risk reduction intervention strategies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-021-81527-7

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. Westgarth, C. et al. Dog owners are more likely to meet physical activity guidelines than people without a dog: an investigation of the association between dog ownership and physical activity levels in a UK community. Sci. Rep. 9, 1–10 (2019). · DOI
  2. Hall, S. S., MacMichael, J., Turner, A. & Mills, D. S. A survey of the impact of owning a service dog on quality of life for individuals with physical and hearing disability: A pilot study. Health Qual. Life Outcomes. 15, 59, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0640-x (2017). · DOI
  3. Foreman, A. M., Glenn, M. K., Meade, B. J. & Wirth, O. Dogs in the workplace: A review of the benefits and potential challenges. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 14(5), 498. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14050498 (2017). · DOI
  4. Hart, L. A., Zasloff, R. L., Bryson, S. & Christensen, S. L. The role of police dogs as companions and working partners. Psychol. Rep. 86, 190–202 (2000). · DOI
  5. Orritt, R. Dog ownership has unknown risks but known health benefits: We need evidence based policy. BMJ https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g4081 (2014). · DOI
  6. Rollett, R., Clancy, R., Taib, B. G. & Mannion, C. RE: Not a plastic surgeon’s best friend: Dog bites an increasing burden on UK plastic surgery services. J. Plast. Reconstr. Aesthetic Surg. 72, 685–710 (2019). · DOI
  7. Knobel, D. L. et al. Re-evaluating the burden of rabies in Africa and Asia. Bull. World Health Organ. 83, 360–368 (2005).
  8. Boat, B. W., Dixon, C. A., Pearl, E., Thieken, L. & Bucher, S. E. Pediatric dog bite victims: A need for a continuum of care. Clin. Pediatr. (Phila). 51, 473–477 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  9. Raghavan, M. Fatal dog attacks in Canada, 1990–2007. Can. Vet. J. 49, 577–581 (2008).
  10. Benson, L. S., Edwards, S. L., Schiff, A. P., Williams, C. S. & Visotsky, J. L. Dog and cat bites to the hand: Treatment and cost assessment. J. Hand Surg. Am. 31, 468–473 (2006). · DOI
  11. De Keuster, T., Lamoureux, J. & Kahn, J. Epidemiology of dog bites: A Belgian experience of canine behaviour and public health concerns. Vet. J. 172, 482–487 (2006). · DOI
  12. Insurance Information Institute. Dog bite homeowners liability claims nationwide increased 18 percent; California, Florida and New York lead nation. in Number of Claims. https://www.iii.org/press-release/dog-bite-homeowners-liability-claims-nationwide-increased-18-percent-california-florida-and-new-york-lead-nation-in-number-of-claims-040517 (2019).
  13. Westgarth, C., Brooke, M. & Christley, R. M. How many people have been bitten by dogs? A cross-sectional survey of prevalence, incidence and factors associated with dog bites in a UK community. J. Epidemiol. Commun. Health 72, 331–336 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  14. Arluke, A., Cleary, D., Patronek, G. & Bradley, J. Defaming Rover : Error-based latent rhetoric in the medical literature on dog bites. J. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. 21, 211–223 (2018). · DOI
  15. Hall, S.S., Dolling, L., Bristow, K., Fuller, T. & Mills, D. Companion Animal Economics: The Economic Impact of Companion Animals in the UK. (CABI, 2017). · DOI · Paper page
  16. Williams, J. G. & Mann, R. Y. Hospital episode statistics: Time for clinicians to get involved?. Clin. Med. 2, 34–37 (2002). · DOI
  17. Spencer, S. A. & Davies, M. P. Hospital episode statistics: Improving the quality and value of hospital data: a national internet e-survey of hospital consultants. BMJ Open 2, e001651 (2012). · DOI
  18. Herbert, A., Wijlaars, L., Zylbersztejn, A., Cromwell, D. & Hardelid, P. Data resource profile: Hospital episode statistics admitted patient care (HES APC). Int. J. Epidemiol. 46, 1093–1093i (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  19. Juang, D., Sippey, M., Zuckerbraun, N., Rutkoski, J. & Gaines, B. A. ‘Non-bite dog-related’ injuries: An overlooked injury mechanism in the pediatric population. J. Trauma 71, S531-533 (2011). · DOI
  20. Owczarczak-Garstecka, S. C. et al. Dog bite safety at work: An injury prevention perspective on reported occupational dog bites in the UK. Saf. Sci. 118, 595–606 (2019). · DOI
  21. Mannion, C. J. & Graham, A. Dog bite injuries in hospital practice. Br. J. Hosp. Med. 77, C165–C168 (2016). · DOI
  22. Willmott, H., Greenheld, N. & Goddard, R. Beware of the dog? An observational study of dog-related musculoskeletal injury in the UK. Accid. Anal. Prevent. 46, 52–54 (2012). · DOI
  23. Morgan, M. & Palmer, J. Dog bites. BMJ 334, 413–417 (2007). · DOI
  24. Tulloch, J. S. P. et al. Characteristics and patient pathways of Lyme disease patients: A retrospective analysis of hospital episode data in England and Wales (1998–2015). BMC Public Health. 19, 931, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7245-8 (2019). · DOI
  25. Newitt, S. et al. The use of syndromic surveillance to monitor the incidence of arthropod bites requiring healthcare in England, 2000–2013: A retrospective ecological study. Epidemiol. Infect. 144, 2251–2259 (2016). · DOI
  26. Cornelissen, J. M. R. & Hopster, H. Dog bites in The Netherlands: A study of victims, injuries, circumstances and aggressors to support evaluation of breed specific legislation. Vet. J. 186, 292–298 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  27. Holzer, K. J., Vaughn, M. G. & Murugan, V. Dog bite injuries in the USA: Prevalence, correlates and recent trends. 2015, 187–190 (2019). · DOI
  28. Marsh, L., Langley, J. & Gauld, R. Dog bite injuries. N. Z. Med. J. 117, 1–6 (2004).
  29. Rosado, B., García-Belenguer, S., León, M. & Palacio, J. A comprehensive study of dog bites in Spain, 1995–2004. Vet. J. 179, 383–391 (2009). · DOI
  30. Rajshekar, M. et al. The incidence of public sector hospitalisations due to dog bites in Australia 2001–2013. Aust. N. Z. J. Public Health 41, 377–380 (2017). · DOI
  31. Wake, A. A. F., Minot, E. O., Stafford, K. J. & Perry, P. E. A survey of adult victims of dog bites in New Zealand. N. Z. Vet. J. 57, 364–369 (2009). · DOI
  32. Creedon, N. & Súilleabháin, P. S. Ó. Dog bite injuries to humans and the use of breed-specific legislation: A comparison of bites from legislated and non-legislated dog breeds. Ir. Vet. J. 70, 23, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13620-017-0101-1 (2017). · DOI
  33. Martínez, A. G., Pernas, G. S., Casalta, J. D., Rey, M. L. S. & Palomino, L. F. C. Risk factors associated with behavioral problems in dogs. J. Vet. Behav. 6, 225–231 (2011). · DOI
  34. BMJ. Seven Days in Medicine: 5–11 June 2019. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4146 (2019). · DOI
  35. Norman, C., Stavisky, J. & Westgarth, C. Importing rescue dogs into the UK: Reasons, methods and welfare considerations. Vet. Rec. 186, 248. https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.105380 (2020). · DOI
  36. McMilan, F. D., Serpell, J. A., Duffy, D. L., Masaoud, E. & Dohoo, I. R. Differences in behavioural characteristics between dogs obtained as puppies from pet stores and those obtained from noncommercial breeders. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 242, 1359–1363 (2013). · DOI
  37. Wauthier, L. M., Williams, J. & SSPCA. Using the mini C-BARQ to investigate the effects of puppy farming on dog behaviour. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 206, 75–86 (2018).
  38. Dotson, M. J. & Hyatt, E. M. Understanding dog – Human companionship. J. Bus. Res. 61, 457–466 (2008). · DOI
  39. Fox, R. & Gee, N. R. Great expectations: Changing social, spatial and emotional understandings of the companion animal–human relationship. Soc. Cult. Geogr. 20, 43–63 (2018). · DOI
  40. Pickup, E., German, A. J., Blackwell, E., Evans, M. & Westgarth, C. Variation in activity levels amongst dogs of different breeds: results of a large online survey of dog owners from the UK. J. Nutr. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1017/jns.2017.7 (2017). · DOI
  41. Westgarth, C. et al. Pet ownership, dog types and attachment to pets in 9–10 year old children in Liverpool. UK. BMC Vet. Res. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-6148-9-102 (2013). · DOI
  42. Reese, L. A., Vertalka, J. J., Wilkins, M. J. & Pizarro, J. M. Demographic and urban environmental variables associated with dog bites in Detroit. JAVMA 254, 986–990 (2019). · DOI
  43. Sinha, S., Peach, G., Poloniecki, J. D., Thompson, M. M. & Holt, P. J. Studies using English administrative data (hospital episode statistics) to assess health-care outcomes-systematic review and recommendations for reporting. Eur. J. Public Health 23, 86–92 (2013). · DOI
  44. Oxley, J. A., Christley, R. & Westgarth, C. Contexts and consequences of dog bite incidents. J. Vet. Behav. Clin. Appl. Res. 23, 33–39 (2018). · DOI
  45. Shuler, C. M., DeBess, E. E., Lapidus, J. A. & Hedberg, K. Canine and human factors related to dog bite injuries. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 232, 542–546 (2008). · DOI
  46. Chapman, S. & Morrell, S. Barking mad? Another lunatic hypothesis bites the dust. BMJ 321, 1561–1563 (2000). · DOI
  47. Bhattacharjee, C., Bradley, P., Smith, M., Scally, A. J. & Wilson, B. J. Do animals bite more during a full moon? Retrospective observational analysis. Animals. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.321.7276.1559 (2000). · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 63

Metadata

Authors
Tulloch, J. S. P., Owczarczak-Garstecka, S. C., Fleming, K. M., Vivancos, R., & Westgarth, C.
ORCID
Venue
Scientific Reports
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2021-01-19
Volume
11
Issue
1
ISSN
2045-2322
DOI
10.1038/s41598-021-81527-7
PMC
PMC7815787
Cited by
63
References
1
Language
en
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review