Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for rabies is widely administered and highly effective. Nevertheless, sporadic breakthrough infections (ie, rabies in people who have started PEP) have been reported. We conducted a systematic review of articles published between Jan 1, 1980 and June 1, 2022 to characterise breakthrough infections. After reviewing 3380 articles from across all continents, we identified 52 articles, which included a total of 122 breakthrough infections. We classified breakthrough infections on the basis of adherence to core practices (ie, wound cleaning and vaccine administration). Of 86 breakthrough infections with data, median time from exposure to symptom onset was 20 days (IQR 16-24). Most (89 [77%] of 115) participants received PEP within 2 days of an exposure. Severe wounds (defined as those involving multiple wound sites or bites to the head, face, or neck) were common (80 [69%] of 116 [with data]). Deviations from core practices were reported in 68 (56%) of 122 cases. Other possible causes for breakthrough infections included errors in the administration of rabies immunoglobulin, delays in seeking health care, and comorbidities or immunosuppression. Cold-chain integrity assessments and potency testing of PEP biologics were only rarely assessed (8 [7%] of 122 cases), neither of which were found to be a cause of breakthrough infections. Timely and appropriate administration of PEP is crucial to prevent rabies, and although people with high-risk exposures or immunosuppression can develop rabies despite adherence to core practices, this occurrence remains exceedingly rare.

INTRODUCTION: Globally, traditional medicine is widely used to treat a variety of injuries and illnesses, including dog bites, and exposures that are risky for rabies. However, efficacy of most traditional remedies used for rabies prevention or treatment has not been demonstrated in controlled trials or proven in community-based surveys. METHODS: Six databases were searched including the terms rabies, traditional treatment, traditional remedy, traditional therapy, traditional medicine, and medicinal treatment to review traditional remedies used in the prevention and treatment of rabies. In addition, published literature of rabies transmission dynamics was used to estimate statistical likelihood of dog bite victims developing rabies to provide clarity as to why traditional healers have a high apparent success rate when preventing death from rabies in victims bitten by suspected rabid dogs. RESULTS: Literature review yielded 50 articles, including three controlled experiments, that described use of traditional remedies for rabies prevention and treatment. Traditional remedies for rabies ranged from plant- or animal-based products to spiritual rituals; however, only a few controlled mice trials were conducted, and none of these trials demonstrated efficacy in preventing or treating rabies. Risk of dying from rabies after a bite from a dog with unknown rabies status is low, 1.90% (0.05%-29.60%). Therefore, traditional healers had a 98.10% (70.40%-99.95%) apparent success rate in preventing death from suspected rabid dog bites despite inefficaciousness of herbal remedies. CONCLUSION: There was no universal plant species or route of administration that was consistently used for rabies prevention or treatment across countries. No traditional remedy was efficacious in the prevention or treatment of rabies in randomized controlled experiments. Understanding the cultural context under which traditional remedies are used may facilitate collaboration of traditional healers with the modern medical system to ensure timely and appropriate use of proven therapies for prevention and clinical management of rabies.