Search

Background: With the future epidemiology and evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) uncertain, the use of safe and effective coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in pediatric populations remains important., Methods: We report data from two open-label substudies of an ongoing phase 1/2/3 master study (NCT05543616) investigating the safety and immunogenicity of a variant-adapted bivalent COVID-19 vaccine encoding ancestral and Omicron BA.4/BA.5 spike proteins (bivalent BNT162b2). The open-label groups presented here evaluate dose 4 with bivalent BNT162b2 in 6-month- to <12-year-olds who previously received three original (monovalent) BNT162b2 doses. In 6-month- to <5-year-olds, primary immunogenicity objectives were to demonstrate superiority (neutralizing titer) and noninferiority (seroresponse rate) to Omicron BA.4/BA.5 and noninferiority (neutralizing titer and seroresponse rate) to SARS-CoV-2 ancestral strains in participants who received bivalent BNT162b2 dose 4 compared with a matched group who received three doses of original BNT162b2 in the pivotal pediatric study (NCT04816643). In 5- to <12-year-olds, primary immunogenicity comparisons were descriptive. Reactogenicity and safety following vaccination were evaluated., Results: In 6-month- to <5-year-olds, dose 4 with bivalent BNT162b2 met predefined immunogenicity superiority and noninferiority criteria against Omicron BA.4/BA.5 and ancestral strains when compared with dose 3 of original BNT162b2. In 5- to <12-year-olds, bivalent BNT162b2 induced robust Omicron BA.4/BA.5 and ancestral strain neutralizing titers comparable with dose 3 of original BNT162b2. The safety profile for dose 4 of bivalent BNT162b2 given as dose 4 was consistent with that of original BNT162b2 in 6-month- to <12-year-olds. Reactogenicity events were generally mild to moderate. No adverse events led to discontinuation., Conclusions: These safety and immunogenicity data support a favorable benefit-risk profile for a variant-adapted BNT162b2 in children <12 years old., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society.)

Background: International travellers may seek care abroad to address health problems that arise during their trip or plan healthcare outside their country of residence as medical tourists., Methods: Data were collected on travellers evaluated at GeoSentinel Network sites who reported healthcare during travel. Both unplanned and planned healthcare were analysed, including the reason and nature of healthcare sought, characteristics of the treatment provided and outcomes. Travellers that presented for rabies post-exposure prophylaxis were described elsewhere and were excluded from detailed analysis., Results: From May 2017 through June 2020, after excluding travellers obtaining rabies post-exposure prophylaxis (n= 415), 1093 travellers reported care for a medical or dental issue that was an unanticipated part of the travellers' planned itinerary (unplanned healthcare). Travellers who sought unplanned healthcare abroad had frequent diagnoses of acute diarrhoea, dengue, falciparum malaria and unspecified viral syndrome, and obtained care in 131 countries. Thirty-four (3%) reported subsequent deterioration and 230 (21%) reported no change in condition; a third (n = 405; 37%) had a pre-travel health encounter. Forty-one travellers had sufficient data on planned healthcare abroad for analysis. The most common destinations were the US, France, Dominican Republic, Belgium and Mexico. The top reasons for their planned healthcare abroad were unavailability of procedure at home (n = 9; 19%), expertise abroad (n = 9; 19%), lower cost (n = 8; 17%) and convenience (n = 7; 15%); a third (n = 13; 32%) reported cosmetic or surgical procedures. Early and late complications occurred in 14 (33%) and 4 (10%) travellers, respectively. Four travellers (10%) had a pre-travel health encounter., Conclusions: International travellers encounter health problems during travel that often could be prevented by pre-travel consultation. Travellers obtaining planned healthcare abroad can experience negative health consequences associated with treatments abroad, for which pre-travel consultations could provide advice and potentially help to prevent complications., (© International Society of Travel Medicine 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Non-immune international travellers are at risk of acquiring hepatitis A. Although hepatitis A vaccination is recommended for unvaccinated travellers to high or intermediate hepatitis A virus endemicity, compliance with this recommendation is not universal.The main objective was to describe the demographic and travel characteristics of international travellers infected with hepatitis A during travel., Methods: Available data on travellers with confirmed (positive molecular test) or probable (symptomatic individuals with a single positive IgM test) hepatitis A diagnosed during and after travel from January 2008 to December 2020 were obtained from the GeoSentinel Surveillance Network database. We analysed demographic and travel characteristics of infected travellers., Results: Among 254 travellers with hepatitis A (185 confirmed and 69 probable), the median age was 28 years (interquartile range: 19-40), 150 (59%) were male, and among 54 travellers with information available, 53 (98%) were unvaccinated. The most common reasons for travel included tourism (n = 120; 47%) and visiting friends or relatives (VFR; n = 72; 28%). About two-thirds of VFR travellers with hepatitis A (n = 50; 69%) were younger than 20 years old. Hepatitis A was acquired most frequently in South-Central Asia (n = 63; 25%) and sub-Saharan Africa (n = 61; 24%), but 16 travellers (6%) acquired hepatitis A in regions with low endemicity including Western Europe (n = 7; 3%), the Caribbean (n = 6; 2%) and North America (n = 3; 1%). Median duration from illness onset to GeoSentinel site presentation was ~7 days (interquartile range : 4-14 days). Among 88 travellers with information available, 59% were hospitalized., Conclusions: Despite availability of highly effective vaccines, travellers still acquire hepatitis A, even when traveling to low-endemicity destinations. Providing pre-departure hepatitis A vaccine to susceptible travellers is crucial to reducing travel-associated hepatitis A and should be offered to all travellers as part of the pre-travel consultation, regardless of destination., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society of Travel Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Early detection of imported multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is crucial, but knowledge gaps remain about migration- and travel-associated MDR-TB epidemiology. The aim was to describe epidemiologic characteristics among international travellers and migrants with MDR-TB., Methods: Clinician-determined and microbiologically confirmed MDR-TB diagnoses deemed to be related to travel or migration were extracted from GeoSentinel, a global surveillance network of travel and tropical medicine clinics, from January 2008 through December 2020. MDR-TB was defined as resistance to both isoniazid and rifampicin. Additional resistance to either a fluoroquinolone or a second-line injectable drug was categorized as pre-extensively drug-resistant (pre-XDR) TB, and as extensively drug-resistant (XDR) TB when resistance was detected for both. Sub-analyses were performed based on degree of resistance and country of origin., Results: Of 201 patients, 136 had MDR-TB (67.7%), 25 had XDR-TB (12.4%), 23 had pre-XDR TB (11.4%) and 17 had unspecified MDR- or XDR-TB (8.5%); 196 (97.5%) were immigrants, of which 92 (45.8%) originated from the former Soviet Union. The median interval from arrival to presentation was 154 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 10-751 days); 34.3% of patients presented within 1 month after immigration, 30.9% between 1 and 12 months and 34.9% after ≥1 year. Pre-XDR- and XDR-TB patients from the former Soviet Union other than Georgia presented earlier than those with MDR-TB (26 days [IQR: 8-522] vs. 369 days [IQR: 84-827]), while patients from Georgia presented very early, irrespective of the level of resistance (8 days [IQR: 2-18] vs. 2 days [IQR: 1-17])., Conclusions: MDR-TB is uncommon in traditional travellers. Purposeful medical migration may partly explain differences in time to presentation among different groups. Public health resources are needed to better understand factors contributing to cross-border MDR-TB spread and to develop strategies to optimize care of TB-infected patients in their home countries before migration., (© International Society of Travel Medicine 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The number of US students studying abroad more than tripled during the past 20 years. As study abroad programmes' destinations diversify, students increasingly travel to resource-limited countries, placing them at risk for infectious diseases. Data describing infections acquired by US students while travelling internationally are limited. We describe illnesses among students who returned from international travel and suggest how to prevent illness among these travellers., Methods: GeoSentinel is a global surveillance network of travel and tropical medicine providers that monitors travel-related morbidity. This study included the records of US resident student international travellers, 17-24 years old, who returned to the USA, had a confirmed travel-related illness at one of 15 US GeoSentinel sites during 2007-17 and had a documented exposure region. Records were analysed to describe demographic and travel characteristics and diagnoses., Results: The study included 432 students. The median age was 21 years; 69% were female. More than 70% had a pre-travel consultation with a healthcare provider. The most common exposure region was sub-Saharan Africa (112; 26%). Students were most commonly exposed in India (44; 11%), Ecuador (28; 7%), Ghana (25; 6%) and China (24; 6%). The median duration of travel abroad was 40 days (range: 1-469) and presented to a GeoSentinel site a median of 8 days (range: 0-181) after travel; 98% were outpatients. Of 581 confirmed diagnoses, the most common diagnosis category was gastrointestinal (45%). Acute diarrhoea was the most common gastrointestinal diagnosis (113 of 261; 43%). Thirty-one (7%) students had vector-borne diseases [14 (41%) malaria and 11 (32%) dengue]. Three had vaccine-preventable diseases (two typhoid; one hepatitis A); two had acute human immunodeficiency virus infection., Conclusions: Students experienced travel-related infections, despite the majority having a pre-travel consultation. US students should receive pre-travel advice, vaccinations and chemoprophylaxis to prevent gastrointestinal, vector-borne, sexually transmitted and vaccine-preventable infections.

Background: Pertussis is a highly contagious, vaccine-preventable respiratory infection that is endemic worldwide. There are limited data regarding the occurrence of pertussis in travelers. The objective of this study is to identify travel-related pertussis cases reported to the GeoSentinel Surveillance Network., Methods: This is a descriptive, retrospective analysis of GeoSentinel records from 25 travel/tropical medicine clinics in 16 countries. Frequencies of demographic and travel-related characteristics and symptoms of 74 cases of pertussis in travelers and new immigrants from 1999 to 2015 were analysed., Results: There were 74 probable and confirmed cases of pertussis in the GeoSentinel database; median age was 44 years, and 38 (51%) patients were female. Tourism was the most common reason for travel (41; 55%). Country of exposure was determined in 66 cases with travelers returning from India and China constituting the highest number of cases (10 cases each; 15% each). Seventy of 74 (95%) patients had respiratory symptoms, while fatigue and fever were reported by 21 (28%) and 20 (27%), respectively. Immunization status against pertussis was unknown. Most cases were reported after 2005 (69; 93%)., Conclusions: Our study describes 74 cases of pertussis acquired during travel and reported to the GeoSentinel Network. Pertussis should be considered in returned travelers who present with respiratory symptoms. Surveillance and detection of imported cases are important to prevent onward transmission in the community. The pre-travel consultation provides an opportunity to verify immunization status and provide routine vaccinations such as pertussis., (© International Society of Travel Medicine, 2017. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com)

Measles remains a risk for travelers, with 94 measles diagnoses reported to the GeoSentinel network from 2000 to 2014, two-thirds since 2010. Asia was the most common exposure region, then Africa and Europe. Efforts to reduce travel-associated measles should target all vaccine-eligible travelers, including catch-up vaccination of susceptible adults., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2015. This work is written by (a) US Government employee(s) and is in the public domain in the US.)

Background: Japanese encephalitis (JE) and rabies are serious vaccine preventable diseases which are an important consideration for travelers to Asia., Methods: Five Boston-area travel clinics collected demographic data, trip information, and interventions for travelers to Asia seen at pre-travel consultations from March 1, 2008, through July 31, 2010. We evaluated travelers for proportion vaccinated for JE and rabies, those traveling for >1 month, and whether travelers had adequate time to complete the JE series (clinic visit ≥28 days before departure) and rabies pre-exposure prophylaxis (clinic visit ≥21 days before departure)., Results: Among 15,440 travelers from five Boston Area Travel Medicine Network travel clinics, Asia was the most common destination region, visited by 5,582 (36%) of travelers. Among these travelers, 4,810 (86%) planned to travel to only one Asian subregion. Median trip duration was 17 days, with more than 20% traveling for >1 month. The most common destinations were South (41%), Southeast (26%), and East (23%) Asia. Of those traveling to South, Southeast, or East Asia, over one-third with trips >1 month had insufficient time to complete a series for either JE or rabies vaccine. Overall, only 10% of travelers were vaccinated (past and pre-travel visit) for either JE or rabies, with lowest percentages among travelers visiting friends and relatives. Most travelers received advice on vector precautions (96%) and rabies prevention, which included avoiding animal contact, washing wounds, and obtaining appropriate post-exposure prophylaxis (88%)., Conclusion: Given the insufficient time for completion and relatively low vaccination rates, greater awareness of earlier pre-travel consultations, at least 4-6 weeks before travel, and accurate risk assessment for travelers are important. Effective counseling about vector avoidance, rabies, and animal bite prevention and management remains critical., (© 2015 International Society of Travel Medicine.)

Background: The International Society of Travel Medicine (ISTM) Pediatric Interest Group (PedIG) was created in 2010. We studied the group's professional characteristics and practice patterns to identify clinical areas requiring further training and research related to pediatric international travel., Methods: PedIG members were emailed a two-part online questionnaire in September 2011, which comprised questions about professional and practice details, followed by a survey regarding decisions on nine patient scenarios that represent common pediatric pre-travel health challenges., Results: Ninety-three (34%) of 273 members completed the survey. Most were physicians (80%) having a primary specialization in pediatrics (55%) and family medicine (19%). About a third (37%) had acquired the ISTM Certificate in Travel Health (CTH); 14 and 11% chose not to provide malaria chemoprophylaxis for a 2-month-old infant and a 13-year-old child traveling to West Africa, respectively. Azithromycin for empiric treatment of travelers' diarrhea in a 2-year-old traveler to Thailand and Mexico was suggested by 74 and 58%, respectively, while the use of acetazolamide for a 2-month old infant traveling to a high-altitude destination was rarely (13%) chosen. In vaccine-focused scenarios, 71, 69, 21, and 10% would prescribe the meningococcal vaccine for a 6-month-old traveler to Burkina Faso, Japanese encephalitis vaccine to a 10-year-old traveler to Cambodia, hepatitis A vaccine to a 6-month-old traveler to El Salvador, and the typhoid vaccine to a 1-year-old traveler to India, respectively., Conclusions: Members of the PedIG have diverse professional and practice backgrounds. Lack of awareness of established guidelines may place international pediatric travelers at risk for travel-associated morbidity. Strategies are needed to facilitate education and support research in pediatric travel medicine to formulate evidence-based guidelines wherever they are currently missing., (© 2014 International Society of Travel Medicine.)

Background: Yellow fever (YF), a potentially fatal mosquito-borne infection, is preventable with a live-attenuated vaccine, rarely associated with severe adverse events. We surveyed travelers to assess their reasons for pre-travel medical consultation, information they considered important regarding YF disease and vaccination, whether they recalled receiving this information, and whether they were involved in vaccine decision-making., Methods: Travelers aged 18 years and older were surveyed at three Boston-area travel clinics. Only those making YF vaccination decisions were included for analyses., Results: Of 831 travelers surveyed, 589 (70%) indicated making a YF vaccination decision. Travel medicine providers recommended YF vaccination to 537 (91%) of 589 travelers; 92% of these 537 received vaccine. Among 101 travelers aged 60 years and older, 9% declined the vaccine; among those younger than 60 years, 4% declined the vaccine (p = 0.06). Of 589 travelers, most agreed they needed to understand destination-specific YF risks (82%) and vaccine risks (88%), and were involved in YF vaccine decisions (87%). Less than half recalled discussing their concerns about YF vaccine with the provider (42%) or what risks and benefits mattered most to them (32%)., Conclusion: Most participants sought YF disease and vaccine risk information and wanted to be involved in decision-making; however, fewer than half recalled discussing their opinions or concerns about YF vaccine. Providers need effective risk communication skills and the ability to elicit and respond to travelers' concerns to help them make informed, shared decisions., (© 2014 International Society of Travel Medicine.)

We describe travelers who were evaluated pre-travel to Brazil from March 2008 through July 2010 in the Boston area. Of 599 Brazil travelers, 71%, 58%, and 50% received vaccines for yellow fever (YF), typhoid, and hepatitis A, respectively. Fewer received influenza and hepatitis B vaccines (14%, 11%). A total of 60% traveled during Brazil's peak influenza season, and one fourth visited during peak dengue transmission. The 2014 World Cup and 2016 Olympics include events throughout Brazil. Travelers should seek pre-travel assessment including YF and malaria risk; travelers should be vaccinated against influenza, be up to date on other routine vaccines, and be prepared to protect themselves against mosquitoes., (© 2014 International Society of Travel Medicine.)

Background: As international travel increases, many health care professionals are being asked to provide pre-travel advice. We designed an anonymous web-based survey to assess the extent to which primary care providers (PCPs) provide travel medicine advice and how their understanding and delivery of itinerary-specific advice and management compare with that of travel medicine specialists., Methods: We surveyed randomly selected US PCPs registered in the Pri-Med Institute (now pmiCME) database and US travel medicine specialists from the International Society of Travel Medicine (ISTM), American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (ASTMH), and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) yellow fever (YF) vaccine provider mailing lists. SAS software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) was used for all analyses., Results: Of 14,932 e-mails sent to valid e-mail addresses, 902 yielded complete or partially completed surveys (6.0% response rate). Eighty percent of respondents personally provided pre-travel advice (95% of travel medicine specialists versus 73% of PCPs). About two thirds of PCPs (68%) providing pre-travel consultations saw <50 travelers per year whereas 30% of travel medicine specialists saw <50 travelers per year. More travel medicine specialists (59%) than PCPs (18%) saw >500 travelers per year. Familiarity with travel-specific vaccines (YF, Japanese encephalitis) and provision of written educational materials increased as volume of travelers increased. Familiarity with antimalarial side effects and malaria resistance patterns, and knowledge scores based on brief pre-travel scenarios were higher in travel medicine specialists, ASTMH or ISTM certificate holders, and respondents who saw more pre-travel patients., Conclusions: Many PCP survey participants provided pre-travel advice, but most saw few travelers. Volume of travelers and holding an ASTMH or ISTM certificate had the greatest influence on knowledge of travel medicine and provision of appropriate advice and recommendations. Creating easily accessible travel medicine education programs for US providers from a wide range of disciplines is needed to improve the management of travelers., (© 2014 International Society of Travel Medicine.)

Background: Dengue viruses have spread widely in recent decades and cause tens of millions of infections mostly in tropical and subtropical areas. Vaccine candidates are being studied aggressively and may be ready for licensure soon., Methods: We surveyed patients with past or upcoming travel to dengue-endemic countries to assess rates and determinants of acceptance for four hypothetical dengue vaccines with variable efficacy and adverse event (AE) profiles. Acceptance ratios were calculated for vaccines with varied efficacy and AE risk., Results: Acceptance of the four hypothetical vaccines ranged from 54% for the vaccine with lower efficacy and serious AE risk to 95% for the vaccine with higher efficacy and minor AE risk. Given equal efficacy, vaccines with lower AE risk were better accepted than those with higher AE risk; given equivalent AE risk, vaccines with higher efficacy were better accepted than those with lower efficacy. History of Japanese encephalitis vaccination was associated with lower vaccine acceptance for one of the hypothetical vaccines. US-born travelers were more likely than non-US born travelers to accept a vaccine with 75% efficacy and a risk of minor AEs (p = 0.003). Compared with North American-born travelers, Asian- and African-born travelers were less likely to accept both vaccines with 75% efficacy., Conclusions: Most travelers would accept a safe and efficacious dengue vaccine if one were available. Travelers valued fewer potential AEs over increased vaccine efficacy., (© 2013 International Society of Travel Medicine.)

Background: Dengue virus (DENV) infections may occur in travelers., Objectives: To determine prevalence of anti-DENV IgG antibody in travelers who lived in or visited dengue-endemic countries and to describe risk factors and characteristics associated with infection and subsequent anti-DENV IgG antibody presence., Methods: Participants were enrolled from travel clinics of the Boston Area Travel Medicine Network from August 2008 through June 2009. Demographic information, trip duration, travel history, and a blood sample were collected. Serum samples were tested for anti-DENV IgG antibody by indirect IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and antibody-mediated virus neutralization by plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT) for anti-DENV IgG antibody-positive and selected negative samples. Participants were stratified into group 1: born in dengue-endemic countries; group 2: born in nonendemic countries but lived continuously for ≥1 year in a dengue-endemic country; group 3: born in nonendemic countries and traveled to a dengue-endemic country for ≥2 weeks but <1 year., Results: Six hundred travelers were enrolled. Anti-DENV IgG antibody was identified in 113 (19%) when tested by ELISA (51% in group 1, 40% in group 2, and 6.9% in group 3) and in 71 (12%) by PRNT (42% primary monotypic and 58% heterotypic reactive responses). Sensitivity and specificity of the ELISA based on PRNT results were 85% to 100% and 79% to 94%, assuming up to 15% misclassification of ELISA negative results. Presence of anti-DENV IgG antibody by ELISA was associated with years lived in dengue-endemic countries and birthplace in the Caribbean for group 1, receipt of Japanese encephalitis vaccine in group 3, and self-reported history of dengue in all three groups., Conclusions: Nineteen percent of participants who were born, lived in, or traveled to dengue-endemic countries had anti-DENV IgG antibody by ELISA; 12% had antibodies by PRNT, 85% of whom had no history of dengue. Presence of DENV antibodies was associated with years lived in dengue-endemic countries and self-reported history of dengue., (© 2013 International Society of Travel Medicine.)

Background: Many nations are struggling to develop structured systems and guidelines to optimize the health of new arrivals, but there is currently no international consensus about the best approach., Methods: Data on 7792 migrants who crossed international borders for the purpose of resettlement and underwent a protocol-based health assessment were collected from the GeoSentinel Surveillance network. Demographic and health characteristics of a subgroup of these migrants seen at 2 US-based GeoSentinel clinics for protocol-based health assessments are described., Results: There was significant variation over time in screened migrant populations and in their demographic characteristics. Significant diagnoses identified in all migrant groups included latent tuberculosis, found in 43% of migrants, eosinophilia in 15%, and hepatitis B infection in 6%. Variation by region occurred for select diagnoses such as parasitic infections. Notably absent were infectious tuberculosis, soil-transmitted helminths, and malaria. Although some conditions would be unfamiliar to clinicians in receiving countries, universal health problems such as dental caries, anemia, ophthalmologic conditions, and hypertension were found in 32%, 11%, 10%, and 5%, respectively, of screened migrants., Conclusions: Data from postarrival health assessments can inform clinicians about screening tests to perform in new immigrants and help communities prepare for health problems expected in specific migrant populations. These data support recommendations developed in some countries to screen all newly arriving migrants for some specific diseases (such as tuberculosis) and can be used to help in the process of developing additional screening recommendations that might be applied broadly or focused on specific at-risk populations.

Background: Increasing international migration may challenge healthcare providers unfamiliar with acute and long latency infections and diseases common in this population. This study defines health conditions encountered in a large heterogenous group of migrants., Methods: Migrants seen at GeoSentinel clinics for any reason, other than those seen at clinics only providing comprehensive protocol-based health screening soon after arrival, were included. Proportionate morbidity for syndromes and diagnoses by country or region of origin were determined and compared., Results: A total of 7629 migrants from 153 countries were seen at 41 GeoSentinel clinics in 19 countries. Most (59%) were adults aged 19-39 years; 11% were children. Most (58%) were seen >1 year after arrival; 27% were seen after >5 years. The most common diagnoses were latent tuberculosis (22%), viral hepatitis (17%), active tuberculosis (10%), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/AIDS (7%), malaria (7%), schistosomiasis (6%), and strongyloidiasis (5%); 5% were reported healthy. Twenty percent were hospitalized (24% for active tuberculosis and 21% for febrile illness [83% due to malaria]), and 13 died. Tuberculosis diagnoses and HIV/AIDS were reported from all regions, strongyloidiasis from most regions, and chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) particularly in Asian immigrants. Regional diagnoses included schistosomiasis (Africa) and Chagas disease (Americas)., Conclusions: Eliciting a migration history is important at every encounter; migrant patients may have acute illness or chronic conditions related to exposure in their country of origin. Early detection and treatment, particularly for diagnoses related to tuberculosis, HBV, Strongyloides, and schistosomiasis, may improve outcomes. Policy makers should consider expansion of refugee screening programs to include all migrants.

Background: Persons born in countries with hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) prevalence ≥2% have increased risk for unrecognized hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Testing at pre-travel consultations is a strategy to identify previously undiagnosed HBV infections. Using records of travelers seen at the Boston Area Travel Medicine Network (BATMN) sites, we assessed how these travel clinics currently assess HBV status, describe test results, and describe characteristics of those tested and immunized for HBV., Methods: Demographic data and trip information were collected for all travelers seen at the BATMN sites from June 2008 through July 2010. Proportions of those tested for HBV were determined, and differences between those tested and not tested were analyzed., Results: Among 13,732 travelers enrolled during the study period, 2,134 (16%) were born in HBV-risk countries (HBsAg prevalence ≥2%); 532/2134 (25%) had previous HBV test results and 230 (11%) had tests performed at the travel clinic visit. Past results showed that 33/453 (7.3%) were HBV-infected (HBsAg+), 252/481 (52.4%) were immune (anti-HBs+, HBsAg-), 164/303 (54.1%) were susceptible (anti-HBs-, HBsAg-, anti-HBc-), and 38/314 (12.1%) had possible HBV exposure (anti-HBc+, HBsAg-, anti-HBs-). Among 230 travelers tested during the travel clinic visit, 7/213 (3.3%) were HBV-infected, 95/218 (43.6%) were immune, 106/179 (59.2%) were susceptible, and 10/182 (5.5%) had possible HBV exposure., Conclusion: The travel clinic offers an opportunity to capture, identify, and educate infected persons unaware of their infection, educate those with known results, and initiate preventive action (eg, vaccination) for those still susceptible., (© 2013 International Society of Travel Medicine.)

Background: Providers must counsel travelers to yellow fever (YF)-endemic areas, although risk estimates of disease and vaccine serious adverse events (SAEs) may be imprecise. The impact of risk information and patients' requests for participation in vaccine decisions on providers' recommendations is unknown., Methods: Vaccine providers were surveyed regarding decisions for 4 patient scenarios before and after being presented information about risk of YF disease vs vaccine SAEs. Participants' theoretical attitudes were compared with actual responses to scenarios in which patients wanted to share vaccine decisions. Analyses were done by using χ(2) tests with significance level of .05., Results: Forty-six percent of respondents made appropriate initial YF vaccine administration decisions for a pregnant woman, 73% for an immunosuppressed man, and 49% for an 8-month-old infant. After receiving scenario-specific information, 20%, 54%, and 23% of respondents respectively who initially responded incorrectly changed to a more appropriate decision. Thirty-one percent of participants made consistently appropriate decisions. Among participants who made ≥1 incorrect decision, 35.7% made no decision changes after receiving information. In the scenario in which either a decision to withhold or to administer vaccine was acceptable, 19% of respondents refused a patient's request for vaccine., Conclusions: Targeted information is necessary but insufficient to change the process of vaccine administration decision making. Providers need additional education to enable them to apply evidence, overcome cognitive decision-making errors, and involve patients in vaccine decisions.

Background: Influenza is a common vaccine-preventable disease among international travelers, but few data exist to guide use of reciprocal hemisphere or out-of-season vaccines., Methods: We analyzed records of ill-returned travelers in the GeoSentinel Surveillance Network to determine latitudinal travel patterns in those who acquired influenza abroad., Results: Among 37,542 ill-returned travelers analyzed, 59 were diagnosed with influenza A and 11 with influenza B. Half of travelers from temperate regions to the tropics departed outside influenza season. Twelve travelers crossed hemispheres from one temperate region to another, five during influenza season. Ten of 12 travelers (83%) with influenza who crossed hemispheres were managed as inpatients. Proportionate morbidity estimates for influenza A acquisition were highest for travel to the East-Southeast Asian influenza circulation network with 6.13 (95% CI 4.5-8.2) cases per 1000 ill-returned travelers, a sevenfold increased proportionate morbidity compared to travel outside the network., Conclusions: Alternate hemisphere and out-of-season influenza vaccine availability may benefit a small proportion of travelers. Proportionate morbidity estimates by region of travel can inform pre-travel consultation and emphasize the ease of acquisition of infections such as influenza during travel., (© 2011 International Society of Travel Medicine.)

Background: Travelers visiting friends or relatives (VFR travelers) are a group identified with an increased risk of travel-related illness. Changes in global mobility, travel patterns, and inter-regional travel led to reappraisal of the classic definition of the term VFR., Methods: The peer-reviewed literature was accessed through electronic searchable sites (PubMed/Medline, ProMED, GeoSentinel, TropNetEurop, Eurosurveillance) using standard search strategies for the literature related to visiting friends/relatives, determinants of health, and travel. We reviewed the historic and current use of the definition of VFR traveler in the context of changes in population dynamics and mobility., Results: The term "VFR" is used in different ways in the literature making it difficult to assess and compare clinical and research findings. The classic definition of VFR is no longer adequate in light of an increasingly dynamic and mobile world population., Conclusions: We propose broadening the definition of VFR travelers to include those whose primary purpose of travel is to visit friends or relatives and for whom there is a gradient of epidemiologic risk between home and destination, regardless of race, ethnicity, or administrative/legal status (eg, immigrant). The evolution and application of this proposed definition and an approach to risk assessment for VFR travelers are discussed.

Background: Travel-associated health risks need to be balanced against the positive opportunities associated with interregional travel. As the perceived and real spectrum of health risks related to international travel increase both quantitatively and qualitatively, the need for more discriminating tools in clinical assessment for the purpose of mitigation, public health management, and research are needed. One group of international travelers identified as having increased risk of poor travel-related health outcomes are those who travel with the specific intent of visiting friends or relatives (VFR travelers). Due to variations in defining VFR travel in the health context there are issues in applying this designation uniformly from multiple perspectives. This article supports the standardization of VFR traveler definitions based on objective criteria and provides illustrations of the application of this definition through an illustrated approach to risk assessment based on these criteria and the differentials in the determinants of health between source and destination regions., Methods: A working group was established by the Migration Health Sub-committee, International Society for Travel Medicine to assess the literature on VFR travel and health, review an evidence-based approach to managing health risk related to travel, and to propose criteria-based definition for VFR travel. The new definition of a VFR is a traveler whose primary purpose of travel is to visit friends or relatives where there is a gradient of epidemiological risk between home and destination., Results: A case scenario discussion of VFR travel defined by criteria and risk assessment based on differential determinants of health is presented in this article., Discussion: The goal of this article is to encourage discussion on travel health evaluation for the most "at risk" populations and to standardize the application of clinical, public health, and research approaches to defining VFR travelers in a risk management context.

Yellow fever continues to occur in regions of Africa and South America, despite the availability of effective vaccines. Recently, some cases of severe neurologic disease and multiorgan system disease have been described in individuals who received yellow fever vaccine. These events have focused attention on the need to define criteria for judicious use of yellow fever vaccine and to describe the spectrum of adverse events that may be associated with yellow fever vaccine. Describing host factors that would increase risk of these events and identifying potential treatment modalities for yellow fever and yellow fever vaccine-associated adverse events are subjects of intense investigation.

Background: Refugees may arrive for resettlement with asymptomatic parasitic infections, and eosinophilia may be the only clue to the presence of infection. Our aim was to determine the prevalence of eosinophilia and develop a standardized approach to the evaluation of asymptomatic refugees with eosinophilia., Methods: We reviewed the medical records of refugees seen from October 1998 through May 2002 at Boston Medical Center. Data examined included age, country of origin, absolute eosinophil count, results of stool ova and parasite testing, and results of serological testing for Strongyloides stercoralis, Schistosoma species, and filaria., Results: Eosinophilia--defined as an absolute eosinophil count of >or=450 cells/microL--was present in 266 (12%) of 2224 refugees. Patients with eosinophilia ranged in age from 2 months to 81 years and had arrived from Africa, Eastern Europe, Southeast Asia, South America, the Caribbean, and the Middle East. Absolute eosinophil counts ranged from 450 to 3224 cells/microL. Pathogens were identified in stool samples of 76 (29%) of 265 patients. Serological testing for S. stercoralis, Schistosoma species, and/or filaria was done for 120 (45%) of 266 patients. Results of serological testing were positive for S. stercoralis in 45 (39%) of 115 patients, for Schistosoma species in 15 (22%) of 67 patients, and for filaria in 18 (51%) of 35 patients. Serological evidence of parasitic infection was seen at all levels of eosinophilia and in patients with and without pathogens identified in their stool samples., Conclusions: Systematic evaluation for parasites in asymptomatic, newly arrived refugees with eosinophilia should include stool ova and parasite examination, serological examination for S. stercoralis for all patients, and serological examination for Schistosoma species and filaria in patients from regions where these organisms are endemic.

Refugees resettling in the United States carry a significant burden of infectious diseases as a result of exposures in their countries of origin and the circumstances of their migration. Overseas screening is required before entry, but it incompletely assesses infectious diseases in refugees. Domestic health assessment has the potential to provide more comprehensive assessment for infectious diseases. Screening protocols ideally should test for tuberculosis, hepatitis B, and intestinal and other parasites and should include mechanisms for providing or updating immunizations. Testing for other infectious diseases, including malaria, hepatitis C, human immunodeficiency virus, and sexually transmitted diseases, can be performed on the basis of clinical signs and symptoms. This article reviews the current status of overseas and domestic health screening for refugees, infectious disease burdens, and future goals for health assessment of refugees and other immigrants.

Background: It is unknown whether it is more cost-effective to test for varicella antibody or to immunize without testing in immigrant populations. The reliability of history of varicella disease is also unclear., Methods: The prevalences of varicella antibody in immigrant children from six regions of the world were used in a cost-effectiveness model to calculate the antibody prevalence above which it is more cost-effective to test rather than to immunize. History of varicella disease was obtained from chart review. We calculated the positive and negative predictive values of varicella history by age group and region., Results: The prevalence of varicella antibody above which it is more cost-effective to test than to immunize was 34% for children less than 13 years old and 17% for those aged 13 years and older. Overall, the positive predictive value of varicella history was 93-100% and the negative predictive value of varicella history was 28-66% among the six geographic regions., Conclusion: Immunization without serotesting was cost-effective in children <5 years of age. Testing prior to immunization was cost-effective in children 5 years of age and older. History of varicella was a good predictor of the presence of antibody to varicella, whereas a negative history was a poor predictor of the absence of antibody to varicella.

Background: Hepatitis A is the most common vaccine-preventable disease in international travelers. Many individuals born and raised in hepatitis A endemic areas are likely to be immune to hepatitis A. Unnecessary hepatitis A immunization could be avoided by taking into account prior exposure to hepatitis A and judicious use of serotesting prior to immunization., Methods: Patients born and raised in countries of high prevalence of hepatitis A who were seen for pretravel consultation and who had hepatitis antibody measured were eligible. Data were collected about country of birth and length of residence there before emigration, length of time till departure on current trip, current age, and hepatitis A antibody result., Results: Patients ranged from 12 to 74 years of age and were from 27 countries. Their pretravel visit occurred from 4 to more than 90 days prior to departure. Ninety-five percent (122 of 129) of patients were immune to hepatitis A, including 100% (83 of 83) of those who resided in their country of origin until at least aged 20. Most patients were seen for pretravel consultation less than 28 days prior to departure., Conclusion: Individuals born and raised until aged 20 in hepatitis A endemic countries are likely to be immune to hepatitis A. Serotesting is most helpful in assessing immunity to hepatitis A in those under 20 years of age.

Immigrant children who enter the United States without immunization records may be required to receive vaccines for diseases to which they are already immune or for which they have previously received immunization. We tested 669 newly arrived refugees (age range, 0-20 years) for antibody to measles, rubella, and varicella, to determine the seroprevalence of antibodies to these diseases in this group of immigrants. Five hundred forty-nine (82%) of 669 patients had antibody to measles, 545 (82%) of 668 had antibody to rubella, and 430 (64%) of 668 had antibody to varicella. Antibody to all 3 diseases increased with increasing age. No clinically significant differences in presence of antibody were noted by region of origin.