Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36048902›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2022

Long-term health effects perceived by snakebite patients in rural Sri Lanka: A cohort study.

Subodha Waiddyanatha, Anjana Silva, Kosala Weerakoon, Sisira Siribaddana, Geoffrey K Isbister

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Cost of Snakebite and Its Impact on Household Economy in Southern Nepal.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The Chinese guideline for management of snakebites.World journal of emergency medicine · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Subodha WaiddyanathaDepartment of Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, Saliyapura, Sri Lanka.
Anjana SilvaDepartment of Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, Saliyapura, Sri Lanka.ORCID 0000-0002-9968-3707
Kosala WeerakoonDepartment of Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, Saliyapura, Sri Lanka.
Sisira SiribaddanaDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Allied Sciences, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, Saliyapura, Sri Lanka.
Geoffrey K IsbisterSouth Asian Clinical Toxicology Research Collaboration (SACTRC), Faculty of Medicine, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka.ORCID 0000-0003-1519-7419
University of Peradeniya · LKRajarata University of Sri Lanka · LK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The acute effects of snakebite are often emphasized, with less information on long-term effects. We aimed to describe the long-term health effects perceived by patients followed up after confirmed snakebites. Two groups of snakebite patients (>18y) from the Anuradhapura snakebite cohort were reviewed: Group I had a snakebite during August 2013-October 2014 and was reviewed after 4 years, and group II had a snakebite during May 2017-August 2018, and was reviewed after one year. Patients were invited by telephone, by sending letters, or doing home visits, including 199 of 736 patients (27%) discharged alive from group I and 168 of 438 patients (38%) from group II, a total of 367 followed up. Health effects were categorised as musculoskeletal, impact on daily life, and medically unexplained. Health issues were attributed to snakebite in 107/199 patients (54%) from group I and 55/168 patients (33%) from group II, suggesting the proportion with health issues increases with time. Sixteen patients (all viperine bites) had permanent musculoskeletal problems, none with a significant functional disability affecting daily routine. 217/367 reported being more vigilant about snakes while working outdoors, but only 21/367 were using protective footwear at review. Of 275 farmers reviewed, only six (2%) had restricted farming activities due to fear of snakebite, and only one stopped farming. 104/199 (52%) of group I and 42/168 (25%) of group II attributed non-specific symptoms (fatigue, body aches, pain, visual impairment) and/or oral cavity-related symptoms (avulsed teeth, loose teeth, receding gums) to the snakebite, which cannot be explained medically. In multivariate logistic regression, farming, type of snake, antivenom administration, and time since snakebite were associated with medically unexplained symptoms. The latter suggests medically unexplained effects increased with time. Based on two groups of snakebite patients reviewed one and four years post-bite, we show that long-term musculoskeletal disabilities are uncommon and not severe in snakebite survivors in rural Sri Lanka. However, a large portion of patients complain of various non-specific general and oral symptoms, not explainable based on the known pathophysiology of snakebite. These perceived effects of snakebite were more common in patients with systemic envenoming, and were more frequent the longer the time post-bite.

Indexed as

Snake BitesAnimalsAntiveninsCohort StudiesHumansSnakesSri LankaAntivenins

Identifiers

PMID36048902
PMCPMC9473613
OpenAlexW4294073979

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.