Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutIR 8354 INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 8354 To the Mayor and Members of the City Council September 25, 2001 ,01 SUBJECT: ANIMAL BITE PREVENTION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT PUROSE: The purpose of this informal report is to present the annual report for the Bite Prevention Program. The annual report,a requirement of this grant funded activity, examines the characteristics of victims, animal owners and animals involved in bite incidents. The report further identifies the geographic distribution of animal bite incidents in the Fort Worth area in order to direct media and educational intervention efforts towards decreasing animal bite incidence and increasing licensing and vaccination. BACKGROUND: The Animal Care and Control Division of the Fort Worth Public Health Department was awarded an Innovations Grant for $168,000 from the Texas Department of Health to impact the incidence of animal bites in Fort Worth. The Bite Prevention Program was selected for funding in recognition of the unique, innovative nature of the project. Funds were provided for the implementation of an animal bite surveillance system using a geographic information system (GIS)and pilot testing of geographically targeted educational interventions. This project has repeatedly gained media attention and has earned national recognition by being selected for presentation at the Annual American Public Health Conference being held in Atlanta, Georgia in October of this year and the ESRI International Health GIS Conference in ashington D.C. in November. Animal bites are a national public health concern. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that in the United States there are 5 million animal bites every year resulting in 334,000 emergency room admissions, 20 deaths, $1 billion in annual homeowners insurance liability and $102.4 million spent on direct emergency medical costs. Further, the CDC reports that animal bites result in substantial costs in terms of lost wages and time lost from work and that 50% of bites involve children under 12 years of age. The CDC has also states that the threat of rabies is high and programs directed towards the prevention of animal bites are a priority intervention towards diminishing the risk of rabies transmission to humans. PROGRAM RESULTS: Since the inception of the GIS Bite Prevention program on July 1, 2000 and through the program's first full year, animal control officers have investigated 1,105 bite incidents. These 1,105 bite events have been used to generate the first annual report. The information garnered through the GIS Bite Prevention program and presented in the annual report provides insight into animal bite incidents occurring in the Fort Worth area. Most injuries associated with animal bites were treated with first aid and the majority of bites involved the extremities including arms, legs, and hands. Slightly more victims were male and most were between the ages of 31 and 60. Most animals involved in bite incidents were dogs and over twice as many of the animals were male than female. Nearly ninety percent of animals involved in bite incidents were not vaccinated against rabies and over ninety-five percent were not licensed with the city. Severe animal bites account for 121 (11%) of the 1,105 bite incidents. The majority of these victims were under 18 years of age and most were male. Most animals involved in severe incidents were dogs. The most commonly reported ,eds involved in a severe bite incident were Rottweilers and Retrievers. Although the majority of victims reported the animal was not provoked, proportionately more victims of severe bites reported having provoked the animal prior to being bitten than victims of less severe bites. Again, most animals involved in severe bite incidents were not vaccinated against rabies (84.3%) nor were they licensed with the city (95%). ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 8354 To the Mayor and Members of the City Council September 25, 2001 Page 2 of 2 pats SUBJECT: ANIMAL BITE PREVENTION PROJECT ANNUAL REPORT Thematic mapping of bite frequency by different geographic strata indicates a concentration of incidents in the areas immediately south and northwest of the central city. Mapping of bite rates calculated using data from the 2000 U.S. Census and census tract level geography reveals a similar pattern seen in mapping bite frequency by ZIP code areas. Spatial analysis of animal bites is ongoing. Thus far, the data indicates that bite incidence and lack of pet vaccination is strongly correlated with the licensing status of the animal. Most animals involved in both bite and severe bite incidents are not licensed and consequently lack required vaccination. This has a direct bearing on licensing issues, which are currently under consideration by the Safety and Community Development Committee. ONGOING ACTIVITY: Maps of bite distributions have been used to target educational interventions towards potential victims and animal owners. Educational resources have thus far been deployed in the two of the four highest incidence ZIP code areas (76110 and 76119) and include pamphlets billboards, information left at residences (flyers, refrigerator magnets, key iams, leashes) and news releases to local television and radio stations. Resources will also be deployed in the other "6igh-incidence ZIP code areas (76106 and 76133) in the near future. Post-intervention evaluation utilizing bite reports and the GIS-based surveillance system will be conducted to assess program effectiveness. The Bite Prevention Program has received a six-month funding extension from the Texas Department of Health in order to continue work on this project. As mentioned above, the data generated by the program is currently being used to target media and educational interventions within the community. In approximately six months, evaluations will be conducted to measure the efficacy of the program. This information will be used for the efficient allocation of Animal Care and Control resources within this community. Further, this project will serve as a benchmark to replicate this activity in other municipalities around the country in order to decrease the occurrence of animal bites.Lastly,successful implementation of this program will increase licensing revenue and decrease the risk of rabies transmission by increasing the rate of pet vaccination throughout the City of Fort Worth. a W. i on City Manager P a W. J City Manager A011 ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS CITY OF FORT WORTH PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT -Epidemiology and Assessment Division- Animal Control Bite Prevention Grant: 2000/2001 Annual Report i Summer 2001 jo CITY OF FORT WORTH PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT a Epidemiology and Assessment Division ? R .ANIMAL BITE PREVENTION PROGRAM: ANNUAL REPORT The Animal Care and Control Division of the City of Fort Worth Public Health Department investigated 1,105 reported bite incidents between July 1, 2000 and .Tune 30, 2001. Injury ranged in severity from minimal (26.3%) to requiring surgical treatment (1.4%). Most bite injuries were treated with first aid (54.2%), but 106 individuals (9.6%) required stitches. The majority of injuries from animal bites involved the extremities including the arms, legs and hands (72.5%), though 197 individuals (17.8%) received bite injuries to the head and 83 (7.5%) received bite injuries to the trunk. Slightly more bite victims were male (54.6%) than female (45.4%). Most were between the ages of 31 and 60, though the next two largest age groups were 8 to 17 and 1 to 7 years old. Over sixty percent of bite victims were White, although Whites comprise only 45.8% of the Fort Worth population. Other racial/ethnic groups were represented proportionately or in lesser proportions compared to the 2000 Fort Worth population'. Age adjustment will be possible with the release of more detailed Census data later in the year. Age Range of Bite Victims RacetEthnicity of Bite Victims 1 to 7 183% White 61.4% 8 to 17 24.3% Black 12.8% 18 to 30 13.7% Hispanic 20.7% 31 to 60 31.6% Other/Unk. 5.1% >60 7.0% Unknown 4.8% Almost forty-percent (38.5%) of victims had at least a high school education. More than 45% of bite victims were either the owner or acquainted with the owner of the animal as either family, friend or neighbor. However, in most cases (73.7%), the owner was not present at the time of the incident. The majority of victims (78.6%) did not provoke the animal. Of those individuals who did, the most commonly cited situation was startling or awaking an animal (8.9%). Animal Owner's Relation to the Victim Same 9.3% Family 15.7% Friend 6.5% Neighbor 15.5% Other 52.9% Most of the animals involved in bite incidents were dogs (82.4%). Cats were indicated in 16.2% of cases and other animals were cited in the remaining 1.4% of cases. Over twice as many male animals were involved in bite cases as females, 51.3% and 22.1% respectively, but animal gender was unknown for 26.6% of reported cases. The age of 2 animal was unknown for the majority of bite incidents (63.3%). For those in which age was known, 32% of animals were 6 or more years old. Owned animals were involved in the majority of cases reported (75.3%), with stray and wild animals accounting for the remaining 24.7%. Nearly ninety percent (89.2%) of animals involved in bite incidents were not vaccinated against rabies and over ninety-five percent (95.6%) were not licensed with the city. .Domestic short haired cats made up the majority of cats involved in bite incidents, while Rottweilers, Shepherds, Retrievers, Chows, and Pit Bulls (as well as mixes of these breeds)were among the top five breeds of dog involved in bite incidents. Animal Bites by Breed of Animal (Total. 1105) Feline Domestic Short Hair 147 Domestic Long Hair 13 Domestic Medium Hair 9 Mixed 3 Other 7 Canine Rottweiler 63 Rottweiler Mix I Shepherd 47 Shepherd Mix 64 Retriever 42 Retriever Mix 32 r% Chow 38 Chow Mix 61 r Pit Bull 38 Pit Bull Mix 40 Terrier 27 Terrier Mix 16 Spaniel 26 Chihuahua 26 Heeler 20 Heeler Mix 7 Dalmatian 14 Dalmatian Mix 3 Doberman 10 Poodle 10 Husky 5 Husky Mix 2 Lhasa Apso 4 Labrador Retriever Mix 2 Mastiff 2 Boxer I Cocker Spaniel I Miniature Collie I Great Dane I Pekinese 1 Pomeranian 1 Shar Pei 1 Mixed 95 Others 209 Other(including wild aiwrwis) 1.5 Analysis of bite frequency by day of the week indicates that Saturdays had the highest occurrence of animal bites (195), followed by Tuesdays and Fridays with 180 and 162 3 1 paaoamiMO'? 1, .uti(wnpltiYYNw /% of severe animal bites than Hispanics and African Americans, 18.2% and 11.6% respectively. At the time of the incident, the most commonly cited known activities of the victim were playing (15.7%) and walking (10.7%). Other activities identified by victims at the time of the incident included petting and teasing, but the majority (66.1%) of respondents reported engaging in "other" activities. Although the majority of severe bite victims (63.6°/x) did not report provoking the animal, over one third (36.4%) reported the animal was provoked compared to 19.7% for victims of less serious bites. The most common provocation cited was startling or awakening the animal (13.6%). Though 52.9% of severe bites were sustained to the extremities (hands, arms, legs), 40.5% of these incidents involved a bite to the head. Most animals involved in severe bite incidents were dogs (96.7%). Of the four cats implicated in severe incidents, three were strays. Almost all of the dogs (94.9%) involved were owned. The two breeds of dog indicated in the most severe bite incidents were Rottweilers and Retrievers. The majority of animals involved in severe bites were male (71.1%). Age of animal was unknown in the majority of cases (519%). For the cases where age was known, 61.4% of animals were three years or younger. Again, a very high percentage of animals involved in severe bites were not vaccinated against rabies (84.3%) nor were they licensed with the city (95%). Severe Bites by Breed of Animal (Total: 121) Feline Domestic Short Hair 2 Domestic Long Hair I Domestic Medium flair I Canine Ronweiler 16 Retriever 12 Retriever Mix 6 Chow 3 Chow Mix 8 Shepherd 2 Shepherd Mix 8 Spaniel 6 Pit Bull 5 Terrier 5 Terrier Mix 2 fleeter 3 Heeler Mix I Dalmatian 2 Doberman 2 Labrador Retriever Mix 1 Poodle I Mixed 10 Others 24 Note:Severe bites are defined as those requiring stitches or surgery. Information regarding the animal owners is limited due to the owner's reluctance to participate in the survey activity. However, where gender is known, owners of animals involved in severe bites are almost equally divided between the genders with males accounting for 51.7% of animal owners. Gender was unknown in 50.4% of the cases. lQ Similarly, age was unknown in 58,6% of the cases. In cases where age is known, the majority (74%) of owners were between the ages of 31 and 60. Educational attainment is 5 known in 52% of cases. Owners having completed high school and those completing college each account for 25.4% of the sample, while 4.8% report a grade school education and 44.4% of the sample report"other" educational experience. Bite incidents were geocoded for use in a geographic information system. Initial geocoding was accomplished utilizing a street file that covers all of Tarrant County since the Animal Control service area extends outside of the city borders. Addresses that were not matched in this file were geocoded against an updated map of streets in the City of Fort Worth. Of the 1105 reported bite incidents, twenty-two addresses could not be mapped. This accounts for only 2% of bite cases. Thematic mapping of bite frequency by different geographic strata, indicates a higher concentration of incidents in the areas immediately south and northwest of the central city in the 76106, 76110, 76119, and 76133 ZIP codes. The second highest frequency stratum of bite incidents contains six ZIP codes; 76105, 76107, 76111, 76112, 76116, and 76137. This is largely consistent with results from the first nine months of the project. Thematic mapping of bites rates calculated by Census tract using 2000 population figures reveals a similar pattern as seen when frequency of bites is mapped by ZIP code. Two of the three high bite rate tracts are within the boundaries of the 76107 and 76119 ZIP codes. Both of these are among the top two strata of ZIP code areas by bite frequency. The third tract identified with a high rate of bites lies mainly within the 76104 ZIP code boundary, though seven of the eight bites reported in this tract are within the 76103 boundary. All of these bites occurred along East Lancaster Avenue and four were ti reported from the same address. Upon further investigation, this address was found to be that of the Humane Society of North Texas. Spatial analyses to determine the distributions of more detailed characteristics of bite incidents is ongoing. Maps of bite distributions in two ZIP code areas from the highest frequency stratum (76110 and 76119) have been utilized in the planning of educational interventions targeting potential victims and animal owners. Analyses of bites by species and confinement status have directed the deployment of media resources to address the bite prevention education needs of the area. Post-intervention evaluation of animal bite distribution will be conducted to assess the effectiveness of the program. Mapping of animal bite incidents has proven useful in presenting data to different segments of the population. Neighborhood associations who have historically been resistant to join in collaborative efforts have supported intervention activities as a result of the visual representation of bite occurrences. Additionally, the local news media has publicized and promotes the project based on the compelling nature of maps displaying the distribution of bites in the community. The capacity to represent spatial data in the medium of a map has proven itself an invaluable tool in visualizing data and making results understandable to the general public. 'U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Redistricting Data Summary File. 6 Animal Site Incident Locations: July 1, 2000 to June 30, 2001 ,,4w1w elm i" t 1 v 6 � b.w i ,... _... to i2 " ,. AMON" , ,,, ` , vv m. U� 10' o u u o 0 Source:Epidemiology and Assessment Division,City of Fort Worth Public Health Department N r Animal Hite Isxmatiott FORTWORTH Major Streets " W E EDFort Worth City limits S Copyright 2001,City of Fort Worth Public Health Department Epidemiology and Assessment Division. All Rights Reserved. . � r • r rr • III r I II r y� rU r 1 idil,� f r. 9 ri Jr r i f �f e r Mi r 'N i / , li r M, 1 l� I f f 6 � ' Mijj� 1 'J � • 1 ak 1 1` 1 _ 1 J 4f ]fir �' 1r, f% '; !i ii I/ %' � ry / 1 f,,,;;r% /� �i rIN'/��/ f„yrn /fir ,/a..ir / lI �,,,, ��' j �/ ,( // � / / /i�; %. ;; r /� % Mai �,; //_ /l � �/�,,;/� ��rr” rr, / r /i!' r , 9 � Y�' } � r AMr ,� �� �, �� � !!! rf, c °ll� iJ /rr'.,�ul °� � r,,,r „r WS'� �i r!J ,rf q %�F it%rr % �, ,k ,r/� ,� ; r o,,, I / � ` �; N � / ��1� / /fj/ / fl � � � Y�I� l� �!F � r, r � �� l� nib r r„ �r � r , � ��(* ri �? ri/ h r r I' r err r(, � 1�J✓,4 ���f� �II � r�i I � u i, ' �,. 1' AW Most biting animals are not restrained You can make a difference. . Restrain your pet with a leash or behind a fence . Vaccinate and license your pet * spay or neuter your pet . Train and socialize your pet '"°°" A message from the Fort Worth Animal control Division � "