02007nas a2200265   4500000000100000008004100001260001200042653001400054653001600068653001500084653001400099100001600113700002100129700001000150700001300160700001300173700001300186700001200199700001200211245008100223856008100304490000700385520133500392022001401727       2021                            d  c07/202110aantivenom10ainformation10amanagement10asnakebite1 aBraitberg G1 aNimorakiotakis V1 aYap C1 aMukaro V1 aWelton R1 aParker A1 aKnott J1 aStory D00aThe Snake Study: Survey of National Attitudes and Knowledge in Envenomation.  uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8310140/pdf/toxins-13-00482.pdf0 v133 a<p>Despite recent reviews of best practice for the treatment of Australian venomous bites and stings, there is controversy about some aspects of care, particularly the use of antivenom. Our aim was to understand current attitudes and practice in the management of suspected snake envenoming. A single-stage, cross-sectional survey of Australian emergency care physicians who had treated snake envenomation in the previous 36 months was conducted. Hospital pharmacists were also invited to complete a survey about antivenom availability, usage, and wastage in Australian hospitals. The survey was available between 5 March and 16 June 2019. A total of 121 snake envenoming cases were reported, and more than a third (44.6%) of patients were not treated with antivenom. For those treated with antivenom ( = 67), 29 patients (43%) received more than one ampoule. Nearly a quarter of respondents (21%) identified that antivenom availability was, or could be, a barrier to manage snake envenoming, while cost was identified as the least important factor. Adverse reactions following antivenom use were described in 11.9% of cases ( = 8). The majority of patients with suspected envenoming did not receive antivenom. We noted variation in dosage, sources of information, beliefs, and approaches to the care of the envenomed patient.</p>  a2072-6651