Search

Background: The types of place names and the level of geographic detail that patients report to clinicians regarding their intended travel itineraries vary. The reported place names may not match those in published travel health recommendations, making traveler-specific recommendations potentially difficult and time-consuming to identify. Most published recommendations are at the country level; however, subnational recommendations exist when documented disease risk varies within a country, as for malaria and yellow fever. Knowing the types of place names reported during consultations would be valuable for developing more efficient ways of searching and identifying recommendations, hence we inventoried these descriptors and identified patterns in their usage., Methods: The data analyzed were previously collected individual travel itineraries from pretravel consultations performed at Global TravEpiNet (GTEN) travel clinic sites. We selected a clinic-stratified random sample of records from 18 GTEN clinics that contained responses to an open-ended question describing itineraries. We extracted and classified place names into nine types and analyzed patterns relative to common travel-related demographic variables., Results: From the 1756 itineraries sampled, 1570 (89%) included one or more place names, totaling 3366 place names. The frequency of different types of place names varied considerably: 2119 (63%) populated place, 336 (10%) tourist destination, 283 (8%) physical geographic area, 206 (6%) vague subnational area, 163 (5%) state, 153 (5%) country, 48 (1%) county, 12 (1%) undefined., Conclusions: The types of place names used by travelers to describe travel itineraries during pretravel consultations were often different from the ones referenced in travel health recommendations. This discrepancy means that clinicians must use additional maps, atlases or online search tools to cross-reference the place names given to the available recommendations. Developing new clinical tools that use geographic information systems technology would make it easier and faster for clinicians to find applicable recommendations for travelers.

Public health investigations can require intensive collaboration between numerous governmental and nongovernmental organizations. We describe an investigation involving several governmental and nongovernmental partners that was successfully planned and performed in an organized, comprehensive, and timely manner with several governmental and nongovernmental partners., (© The American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.)

Background: International travel can expose travellers to pathogens not commonly found in their countries of residence, like dengue virus. Travellers and the clinicians who advise and treat them have unique needs for understanding the geographic extent of risk for dengue. Specifically, they should assess the need for prevention measures before travel and ensure appropriate treatment of illness post-travel. Previous dengue-risk maps published in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Yellow Book lacked specificity, as there was a binary (risk, no risk) classification. We developed a process to compile evidence, evaluate it and apply more informative risk classifications., Methods: We collected more than 839 observations from official reports, ProMED reports and published scientific research for the period 2005-2014. We classified each location as frequent/continuous risk if there was evidence of more than 10 dengue cases in at least three of the previous 10 years. For locations that did not fit this criterion, we classified locations as sporadic/uncertain risk if the location had evidence of at least one locally acquired dengue case during the last 10 years. We used expert opinion in limited instances to augment available data in areas where data were sparse., Results: Initial categorizations classified 134 areas as frequent/continuous and 140 areas as sporadic/uncertain. CDC subject matter experts reviewed all initial frequent/continuous and sporadic/uncertain categorizations and the previously uncategorized areas. From this review, most categorizations stayed the same; however, 11 categorizations changed from the initial determinations., Conclusions: These new risk classifications enable detailed consideration of dengue risk, with clearer meaning and a direct link to the evidence that supports the specific classification. Since many infectious diseases have dynamic risk, strong geographical heterogeneities and varying data quality and availability, using this approach for other diseases can improve the accuracy, clarity and transparency of risk communication., (Published by Oxford University Press 2016. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.)

In response to the largest recognized Ebola virus disease epidemic now occurring in West Africa, the governments of affected countries, CDC, the World Health Organization (WHO), and other international organizations have collaborated to implement strategies to control spread of the virus. One strategy recommended by WHO calls for countries with Ebola transmission to screen all persons exiting the country for "unexplained febrile illness consistent with potential Ebola infection." Exit screening at points of departure is intended to reduce the likelihood of international spread of the virus. To initiate this strategy, CDC, WHO, and other global partners were invited by the ministries of health of Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone to assist them in developing and implementing exit screening procedures. Since the program began in August 2014, an estimated 80,000 travelers, of whom approximately 12,000 were en route to the United States, have departed by air from the three countries with Ebola transmission. Procedures were implemented to deny boarding to ill travelers and persons who reported a high risk for exposure to Ebola; no international air traveler from these countries has been reported as symptomatic with Ebola during travel since these procedures were implemented.

Background: Through 2 international traveler-focused surveillance networks (GeoSentinel and TropNet), we identified and investigated a large outbreak of acute muscular sarcocystosis (AMS), a rarely reported zoonosis caused by a protozoan parasite of the genus Sarcocystis, associated with travel to Tioman Island, Malaysia, during 2011-2012., Methods: Clinicians reporting patients with suspected AMS to GeoSentinel submitted demographic, clinical, itinerary, and exposure data. We defined a probable case as travel to Tioman Island after 1 March 2011, eosinophilia (>5%), clinical or laboratory-supported myositis, and negative trichinellosis serology. Case confirmation required histologic observation of sarcocysts or isolation of Sarcocystis species DNA from muscle biopsy., Results: Sixty-eight patients met the case definition (62 probable and 6 confirmed). All but 2 resided in Europe; all were tourists and traveled mostly during the summer months. The most frequent symptoms reported were myalgia (100%), fatigue (91%), fever (82%), headache (59%), and arthralgia (29%); onset clustered during 2 distinct periods: "early" during the second and "late" during the sixth week after departure from the island. Blood eosinophilia and elevated serum creatinine phosphokinase (CPK) levels were observed beginning during the fifth week after departure. Sarcocystis nesbitti DNA was recovered from 1 muscle biopsy., Conclusions: Clinicians evaluating travelers returning ill from Malaysia with myalgia, with or without fever, should consider AMS, noting the apparent biphasic aspect of the disease, the later onset of elevated CPK and eosinophilia, and the possibility for relapses. The exact source of infection among travelers to Tioman Island remains unclear but needs to be determined to prevent future illnesses., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2014. This work is written by (a) US Government employee(s) and is in the public domain in the US.)

Few data regarding the use of Japanese encephalitis (JE) vaccine in clinical practice are available. We identified 711 travelers at higher risk and 7,578 travelers at lower risk for JE who were seen at US Global TravEpiNet sites from September of 2009 to August of 2012. Higher-risk travelers were younger than lower-risk travelers (median age = 29 years versus 40 years, P < 0.001). Over 70% of higher-risk travelers neither received JE vaccine during the clinic visit nor had been previously vaccinated. In the majority of these instances, clinicians determined that the JE vaccine was not indicated for the higher-risk traveler, which contradicts current recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Better understanding is needed of the clinical decision-making regarding JE vaccine in US travel medicine practices., (© The American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.)

Importance: Travelers from around the globe will attend the 2014 Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup and the 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Brazil. Travelers to these mass gathering events may be exposed to a range of health risks, including a variety of infectious diseases. Most travelers who become ill will present to their primary care physicians, and thus it is important that clinicians are aware of the risks their patients encountered., Objective: To highlight health and safety concerns for people traveling to these events in Brazil so that health care practitioners can better prepare travelers before they travel and more effectively diagnose and treat travelers after they return., Evidence Review: We reviewed both peer-reviewed and gray literature to identify health outcomes associated with travel to Brazil and mass gatherings. Thirteen specific infectious diseases are described in terms of signs, symptoms, and treatment. Relevant safety and security concerns are also discussed., Findings: Travelers to Brazil for mass gathering events face unique health risks associated with their travel., Conclusions and Relevance: Travelers should consult a health care practitioner 4 to 6 weeks before travel to Brazil and seek up-to-date information regarding their specific itineraries. For the most up-to-date information, health care practitioners can visit the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Travelers' Health website (http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel) or review CDC's Yellow Book online (http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/page/yellowbook-home-2014).

Background: Pretravel health consultations help international travelers manage travel-related illness risks through education, vaccination, and medication. This study evaluated costs and benefits of that portion of the health consultation associated with malaria prevention provided to US travelers bound for West Africa., Methods: The estimated change in disease risk and associated costs and benefits resulting from traveler adherence to malaria chemoprophylaxis were calculated from 2 perspectives: the healthcare payer's and the traveler's. We used data from the Global TravEpiNet network of US travel clinics that collect de-identified pretravel data for international travelers. Disease risk and chemoprophylaxis effectiveness were estimated from published medical reports. Direct medical costs were obtained from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample and published literature., Results: We analyzed 1029 records from January 2009 to January 2011. Assuming full adherence to chemoprophylaxis regimens, consultations saved healthcare payers a per-traveler average of $14 (9-day trip) to $372 (30-day trip). For travelers, consultations resulted in a range of net cost of $20 (9-day trip) to a net savings of $32 (30-day trip). Differences were mostly driven by risk of malaria in the destination country., Conclusions: Our model suggests that healthcare payers save money for short- and longer-term trips, and that travelers save money for longer trips when travelers adhere to malaria recommendations and prophylactic regimens in West Africa. This is a potential incentive to healthcare payers to offer consistent pretravel preventive care to travelers. This financial benefit complements the medical benefit of reducing the risk of malaria.

Background: Rabies, which is globally endemic, poses a risk to international travelers. To improve recommendations for travelers, we assessed the global availability of rabies vaccine (RV) and rabies immune globulin (RIG)., Methods: We conducted a 20-question online survey, in English, Spanish, and French, distributed via e-mail to travel medicine providers and other clinicians worldwide from February 1 to March 30, 2011. Results were compiled according to the region., Results: Among total respondents, only 190 indicated that they provided traveler postexposure care. Most responses came from North America (38%), Western Europe (19%), Australia and South and West Pacific Islands (11%), East and Southeast Asia (8%), and Southern Africa (6%). Approximately one third of 187 respondents stated that patients presented with wounds from an animal exposure that were seldom or never adequately cleansed. RIG was often or always accessible for 100% (n = 5) of respondents in the Middle East and North Africa; 94% (n = 17) in Australia and South and West Pacific Islands; 20% (n = 1) in Tropical South America; and 56% (n = 5) in Eastern Europe and Northern Asia. Ninety-one percent (n = 158) of all respondents reported that RV was often or always accessible. For all regions, 35% (n = 58) and 26% (n = 43) of respondents felt that the cost was too high for RIG and RV, respectively., Conclusion: The availability of RV and RIG varied by geographic region. All travelers should be informed that RIG and RV might not be readily available at their destination and that travel health and medical evacuation insurance should be considered prior to departure. Travelers should be educated to avoid animal exposures; to clean all animal bites, licks, and scratches thoroughly with soap and water; and to seek medical care immediately, even if overseas., (© 2013 International Society of Travel Medicine.)

Immigrants returning home to visit friends and relatives (VFR travelers) are at higher risk of travel-associated illness than other international travelers. We evaluated 3,707 VFR and 17,507 non-VFR travelers seen for pre-travel consultation in Global TravEpiNet during 2009-2011; all were traveling to resource-poor destinations. VFR travelers more commonly visited urban destinations than non-VFR travelers (42% versus 30%, P < 0.0001); 54% of VFR travelers were female, and 18% of VFR travelers were under 6 years old. VFR travelers sought health advice closer to their departure than non-VFR travelers (median days before departure was 17 versus 26, P < 0.0001). In multivariable analysis, being a VFR traveler was an independent predictor of declining a recommended vaccine. Missed opportunities for vaccination could be addressed by improving the timing of pre-travel health care and increasing the acceptance of vaccines. Making pre-travel health care available in primary care settings may be one step to this goal.

On March 11, 2011, a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and subsequent tsunami damaged nuclear reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi complex in Japan, resulting in radionuclide release. In response, US officials augmented existing radiological screening at its ports of entry (POEs) to detect and decontaminate travelers contaminated with radioactive materials. During March 12 to 16, radiation screening protocols detected 3 travelers from Japan with external radioactive material contamination at 2 air POEs. Beginning March 23, federal officials collaborated with state and local public health and radiation control authorities to enhance screening and decontamination protocols at POEs. Approximately 543 000 (99%) travelers arriving directly from Japan at 25 US airports were screened for radiation contamination from March 17 to April 30, and no traveler was detected with contamination sufficient to require a large-scale public health response. The response highlighted synergistic collaboration across government levels and leveraged screening methods already in place at POEs, leading to rapid protocol implementation. Policy development, planning, training, and exercising response protocols and the establishment of federal authority to compel decontamination of travelers are needed for future radiological responses. Comparison of resource-intensive screening costs with the public health yield should guide policy decisions, given the historically low frequency of contaminated travelers arriving during radiological disasters.

Background: Infectious disease specialists who evaluate international travelers before or after their trips need skills to prevent, recognize, and treat an increasingly broad range of infectious diseases. Wide variation exists in training and percentage effort among providers of this care. In parallel, there may be variations in approach to pre-travel consultation and the types of travel-related illness encountered. Aggregate information from travel-medicine providers may reveal practice patterns and novel trends in infectious illness acquired through travel., Methods: The 1,265 members of the Infectious Disease Society of America's Emerging Infections Network were queried by electronic survey about their training in travel medicine, resources used, pre-travel consultations, and evaluation of ill-returning travelers. The survey also captured information on whether any of 10 particular conditions had been diagnosed among ill-returning travelers, and if these diagnoses were perceived to be changing in frequency., Results: A majority of respondents (69%) provided both pre-travel counseling and post-travel evaluations, with significant variation in the numbers of such consultations. A majority of all respondents (61%) reported inadequate training in travel medicine during their fellowship years. However, a majority of recent graduates (55%) reported adequate preparation. Diagnoses of malaria, traveler's diarrhea, and typhoid fever were reported by the most respondents (84, 71, and 53%, respectively)., Conclusions: The percent effort dedicated to pre-travel evaluation and care of the ill-returning traveler vary widely among infectious disease specialists, although a majority participate in these activities. On the basis of respondents' self-assessment, recent fellowship training is reported to equip graduates with better skills in these areas than more remote training. Ongoing monitoring of epidemiologic trends of travel-related illness is warranted., (© 2012 International Society of Travel Medicine.)

Background:  International travel poses a risk of destination-specific illness and may contribute to the global spread of infectious diseases. Despite this, little is known about the health characteristics and pretravel healthcare of US international travelers, particularly those at higher risk of travel-associated illness., Methods:  We formed a national consortium (Global TravEpiNet) of 18 US clinics registered to administer yellow fever vaccination. We collected data regarding demographic and health characteristics, destinations, purpose of travel, and pretravel healthcare from 13235 international travelers who sought pretravel consultation at these sites from January 2009 through January 2011., Results:  The destinations and itineraries of Global TravEpiNet travelers differed from those of the overall population of US international travelers. The majority of Global TravEpiNet travelers were visiting low- or lower-middle-income countries, and Africa was the most frequently visited region. Seventy-five percent of travelers were visiting malaria-endemic countries, and 38% were visiting countries endemic for yellow fever. Fifty-nine percent of travelers reported ≥1 medical condition. Atovaquone/proguanil was the most commonly prescribed antimalarial drug, and most travelers received an antibiotic for self-treatment of travelers' diarrhea. Hepatitis A and typhoid were the most frequently administered vaccines., Conclusions:  Data from Global TravEpiNet provide insight into the characteristics and pretravel healthcare of US international travelers who are at increased risk of travel-associated illness due to itinerary, purpose of travel, or existing medical conditions. Improved understanding of this epidemiologically significant population may help target risk-reduction strategies and interventions to limit the spread of infections related to global travel.

Typhoid fever continues to be an important concern for travelers visiting many parts of the world. This communication provides updated guidance for pre-travel typhoid vaccination from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and describes the methodology for assigning country-specific recommendations., (© 2011 International Society of Travel Medicine.)

Background: Globally mobile populations are at higher risk of acquiring geographically restricted infections and may play a role in the international spread of infectious diseases. Despite this, data about sources of health information used by international travelers are limited., Methods: We surveyed 1,254 travelers embarking from Boston Logan International Airport regarding sources of health information. We focused our analysis on travelers to low or low-middle income (LLMI) countries, as defined by the World Bank 2009 World Development Report., Results: A total of 476 survey respondents were traveling to LLMI countries. Compared with travelers to upper-middle or high income (UMHI) countries, travelers to LLMI countries were younger, more likely to be foreign-born, and more frequently reported visiting family as the purpose of their trip. Prior to their trips, 46% of these travelers did not pursue health information of any type. In a multivariate analysis, being foreign-born, traveling alone, traveling for less than 14 days, and traveling for vacation each predicted a higher odds of not pursuing health information among travelers to LLMI countries. The most commonly cited reason for not pursuing health information was a lack of concern about health problems related to the trip. Among travelers to LLMI countries who did pursue health information, the internet was the most common source, followed by primary care practitioners. Less than a third of travelers to LLMI countries who sought health information visited a travel medicine specialist., Conclusions: In our study, 46% of travelers to LLMI countries did not seek health advice prior to their trip, largely due to a lack of concern about health issues related to travel. Among travelers who sought medical advice, the internet and primary care providers were the most common sources of information. These results suggest the need for health outreach and education programs targeted at travelers and primary care practitioners., (© 2010 International Society of Travel Medicine.)

Background Children frequently travel internationally. Health-related data on such children are limited. We sought to investigate the demographics, health characteristics, and preventive interventions of outbound US international pediatric travelers. Methods We analyzed data from 32 099 travelers presenting for pre-travel healthcare at the Global TravEpiNet (GTEN), a national consortium of 19 travel clinics, from January 1, 2009 to June 6, 2012. Results A total of 3332 (10%) of all GTEN travelers were children (<18 years of age). These children traveled mostly for leisure (36%) or to visit friends or relatives (VFR) (36%). Most popular destination regions were Africa (41%), Southeast Asia (16%), Central America (16%), and the Caribbean (16%). Compared with children traveling for leisure, VFR children were more likely to present <14 days before departure for pre-travel consultation (44% vs 28%), intended to travel for 28 days or longer (70% vs 22%), and to travel to Africa (62% vs 32%). Nearly half of the pediatric travelers (46%) received at least 1 routine vaccine, and most (83%) received at least 1 travel-related vaccine. Parents or guardians of one third of the children (30%) refused at least 1 recommended travel-related vaccine. Most pediatric travelers visiting a malaria-endemic country (72%) received a prescription for malaria chemoprophylaxis. Conclusions Ten percent of travelers seeking pre-travel healthcare at GTEN sites are children. VFR-travel, pre-travel consultation close to time of departure, and refusal of recommended vaccines may place children at risk for travel-associated illness. Strategies to engage pediatric travelers in timely, pre-travel care and improve acceptance of pre-travel healthcare interventions are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]