It appears that a large segment of the dog population is not accessible for parenteral vaccination, resulting in a vaccination coverage too low to interrupt the chain of infection.
Although OVD was suggested as a supplementary technique to traditional parenteral vaccination, it seems that in areas like Mindoro where all dogs are unrestricted and only few animals are accessible for parenteral vaccination (within reasonable time and effort), it is more efficient to use only oral vaccination.
For example, during a mass vaccination campaign in Metro Manila, Philippines, total person minutes spent per dog, accessible for parenteral vaccination, was 13.96 minutes [ 10].
In Kusadasi, Turkey, 59% of all free-roaming dogs could not be vaccinated by the parenteral route, but were accessible for oral vaccination [ 8].
With a vaccination coverage of almost 78% of owned dogs, the majority of the owned dog population was relatively easily accessible for free vaccination campaigns.
Partly, because a large segment of the dog population is not accessible for traditional vaccination by the parenteral route.
This system, going house-to-house and offering a bait to every free-roaming or restricted dog encountered that is not accessible for parenteral vaccination, was developed and tested in Turkey [ 8, 9].
–Opinion Leader Other facilitators included convenient, safe and accessible community settings for vaccination that assure patient privacy; competent, trusted and friendly staff; and endorsement by government, hospitals and medical institutions.
In the Philippines, traditional mass dog vaccination campaigns have only achieved limited and transient success in dog rabies control, mainly because a large segment of the dog population is not accessible for traditional parenteral vaccination.
When mothers perceived vaccination site was not accessible and they did not knew vaccine schedule of their site, they might not take their children for vaccination.
