Brief ReportMost lay people can correctly identify indigenous venomous snakes
Introduction
There are several thousand crotaline snake envenomations each year in the United States resulting in 1 to 2 deaths [1], [2], [3] although there is some evidence that these numbers may be underreported [4]. Management decisions in cases of suspected snakebites, are problematic because the identity of the snake is often not known [1], [2], [3], many bites are dry and do not produce envenomation [5], and the treatment can be associated with significant morbidity [6].
To more accurately identify those patients requiring antivenin, some sources have suggested that the captured or killed snake be brought to the ED with the victim [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]. The inherent danger in this practice is obviously the risk of additional envenomations (to the victim or others) from the attempts to capture, kill, or transport the snake. To determine the need for this practice in southern California, we tested the lay public's ability to identify indigenous venomous and nonvenomous snakes.
Section snippets
Methods
Specimens of live venomous and nonvenomous snakes were displayed to the public to determine how accurately they could be identified. All snakes were mature specimens and were common to the geographic area. The displayed nonvenomous snakes were gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus catenifer), San Bernardino mountain king snake (Lampropeltis zonata parvirubra), California common king snake (Lampropeltis getulus californiae), and California rosy boa (Lichanura trivirgata gracia). The displayed
Results
A total of 281 subjects were entered into the study. Of these, 265 completed the data forms and were eligible for analysis. Of those that indicated their ages, 72 were children (<18 years) and 169 were adults (≥18 years). Median age was 25 years with a range from 4 to 64 years. Of those that indicated their sex on the form, 104 were female and 110 were male (these data are noted in Table 1).
The percentage of subjects who correctly identified the snakes as being poisonous or nonpoisonous is
Discussion
Antivenin administration is associated with some morbidity. The primary complications of Antivenin (Crotalidae) Polyvalent (Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories, Collegeville, PA) are hypersensitivity reactions. Anaphylaxis and anaphylactoid reactions occur more than 20% of the time [5], [12]. Delayed serum sickness approaches 75% in those receiving large doses [13]. A new preparation, Crotalidae Polyvalent Immune Fab (Ovine [CroFab, Altana, Inc, Melville, NY]), appears to have fewer side effects but is
Acknowledgments
Redlands Market Night.
References (23)
- et al.
2000 annual report of the American Association of Poison Control Centers toxic exposure surveillance system
Am J Emerg Med
(2001) - et al.
1999 annual report of the American Association of Poison Control Centers toxic exposure surveillance system
Am J Emerg Med
(2000) - et al.
1998 annual report of the American Association of Poison Control Centers toxic exposure surveillance system
Am J Emerg Med
(1999) - et al.
Deaths resulting from animal attacks in the United States
Wilderness Environ Med
(1997) - et al.
Efficacy, safety, and use of snake antivenoms in the United States
Ann Emerg Med
(2001) - et al.
North American snake envenomation: diagnosis, treatment, and management
Emerg Med Clin North Am
(2004) - et al.
Preliminary clinical observations with prophylactic cyproheptadine hydrochloride in potential serum reactions to antivenins
- et al.
Significant envenomation from a preserved rattlesnake head (in a patient with a history of immediate hypersensitivity to antivenin)
Ann Emerg Med
(1986) - et al.
The legitimacy of rattlesnake bites in central Arizona
Ann Emerg Med
(1989) - et al.
Rattlesnake bites in southern California and rationale for recommended treatment
West J Med
(1988)
Venomous animal injuries
Cited by (19)
Snakebites Reported to the Kentucky Regional Poison Control Centers for the Years 2012-2016
2021, Wilderness and Environmental MedicineCitation Excerpt :Snake species were often self-reported, and the reliability of a person’s ability to properly identify snake species was not determined in this study. A previous study determined laypersons could distinguish between a venomous and nonvenomous snake 81% of the time.26 The 5-y time period for which data was collected may be insufficient to properly encompass trends in snakebites in Kentucky.
Snakebites Treated in North Carolina Emergency Departments, October 2013–September 2015
2018, Wilderness and Environmental MedicineAn Analysis of Media-Reported Venomous Snakebites in the United States, 2011-2013
2016, Wilderness and Environmental MedicineCitation Excerpt :Snake species identification often relies solely on victim accounts. This is generally considered reliable,19 but in at least one case, the snake involved was reported as both a copperhead and then later as a water moccasin (cottonmouth). Similarly, additional details may emerge with time.
Neurological effects of venomous bites and stings. Snakes, spiders, and scorpions
2013, Handbook of Clinical NeurologyCitation Excerpt :Some relatively dangerous species of this family include the boomslang (Dispholidus typhus), the vine snake (Thelothornis kirtlandii), and the Japanese garter snake (Rhabdophis tigrinus) (Kamiguti et al., 2000). In many cases, different venomous snakes may be recognized by their victims not only by their geographical location, but also for their size, color, and the characteristics of their head and fangs (Corbett et al., 2005) (Fig. 28.1). In other cases, misidentification may occur even if the snake is available for examination by experts.
Frogs under friendly fire: How accurately can the general public recognize invasive species?
2010, Biological ConservationCitation Excerpt :An inability to correctly identify wildlife species can have a range of consequences. Unintentional killing of protected species by hunters and fishermen (above) is the most obvious such case, but others include public health: for example, an inability of people to identify snakes can create problems in snakebite management (Morrison et al., 1983; but see Corbett et al., 2005 for a counter-example). One interesting category involves misidentifications by members of the general public who are engaged in activities designed to contribute specifically to conservation.
Snakebite injuries treated in United States emergency departments, 2001-2004
2007, Wilderness and Environmental Medicine