We aimed to monitor the adverse effects (AE) and efficacy of post exposure prophylaxis (PEP) in health care workers (HCWs) exposed to a rabies patient. In this study 109 HCWs and eight household contacts were PEP candidates. Contact persons without infection control precautions were in Group I (high risk82 cases). HCWs indirectly exposed to environmental surfaces were classified in Group II (low risk-35 cases). PEP schedule was rabies vaccine (RBV) ţ equine rabies immunoglobulin (eRIG) in Group I and only RBV in Group II. Local and systemic AE were observed in all cases. Efficacy of post exposure prophylaxis (PEP) was determined by rabies development in a six month follow-up. 585 doses of RBV have been used in 117 cases and eRIG has been used in 82 cases. 32 Nurses (39%); 22 emergency medicine technicians (26.8%); 12 doctors (14%); six laboratory technicians (0.07%); six radiology technicians (0.07%); four cleaners (0.05%) were in Group I (82 cases), respectively. One doctor, laboratory technician, nurse and radiology technician (0.02%); two emergency medicine technicians (0.04%) and nine cleaners (25.7%) were in Group II (35 cases), respectively. Routes of transmission were blood in five (0.06%); saliva in 14 (17%); sweat in 50 (61%); CSF/serum in five (0.06%); sexual intercourse in one (0.01%); personal equipment in seven (0.09%) in Group I, respectively. Indirect contact was the only route in Group II. The most common local and systemic AE were seen in Group I; pain at injection side (19 cases) and fever (13 cases). Both of them showed statistically significant difference (P<0.05). Allergic rash has been seen at only one case. PEP failed in one case where the possible exposure way was sexual intercourse. PEP is the safest way to prevent rabies. Infection control precautions were still not enough applied. eRIGs are also safe and have rare AE.  Kulcsszavak: rabies, post exposure prophylaxis, health care worker