Search

In this retrospective review of travel-associated dengue reported to GeoSentinel, complicated dengue occurred in 95 of 5958 (2%) patients. The most common laboratory findings and signs were thrombocytopenia, elevated aminotransferase, bleeding, and plasma leakage. Clinicians should monitor patients with dengue for warning signs that may indicate progression to severe disease. Visual Abstract. Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes Among Travelers With Severe Dengue: In this retrospective review of travel-associated dengue reported to GeoSentinel, complicated dengue occurred in 95 of 5958 (2%) patients. The most common laboratory findings and signs were thrombocytopenia, elevated aminotransferase, bleeding, and plasma leakage. Clinicians should monitor patients with dengue for warning signs that may indicate progression to severe disease. Background: Dengue virus is a flavivirus transmitted by Aedes mosquitoes and is an important cause of illness worldwide. Data on the severity of travel-associated dengue illness are limited. Objective: To describe the epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and outcomes among international travelers with severe dengue or dengue with warning signs as defined by the 2009 World Health Organization classification (that is, complicated dengue). Design: Retrospective chart review and analysis of travelers with complicated dengue reported to GeoSentinel from January 2007 through July 2022. Setting: 20 of 71 international GeoSentinel sites. Patients: Returning travelers with complicated dengue. Measurements: Routinely collected surveillance data plus chart review with abstraction of clinical information using predefined grading criteria to characterize the manifestations of complicated dengue. Results: Of 5958 patients with dengue, 95 (2%) had complicated dengue. Eighty-six (91%) patients had a supplemental questionnaire completed. Eighty-five of 86 (99%) patients had warning signs, and 27 (31%) were classified as severe. Median age was 34 years (range, 8 to 91 years); 48 (56%) were female. Patients acquired dengue most frequently in the Caribbean (n  = 27 [31%]) and Southeast Asia (n  = 21 [24%]). Frequent reasons for travel were tourism (46%) and visiting friends and relatives (32%). Twenty-one of 84 (25%) patients had comorbidities. Seventy-eight (91%) patients were hospitalized. One patient died of nondengue-related illnesses. Common laboratory findings and signs were thrombocytopenia (78%), elevated aminotransferase (62%), bleeding (52%), and plasma leakage (20%). Among severe cases, ophthalmologic pathology (n  = 3), severe liver disease (n  = 3), myocarditis (n  = 2), and neurologic symptoms (n  = 2) were reported. Of 44 patients with serologic data, 32 confirmed cases were classified as primary dengue (IgM+/IgG−) and 12 as secondary (IgM−/IgG+) dengue. Limitations: Data for some variables could not be retrieved by chart review for some patients. The generalizability of our observations may be limited. Conclusion: Complicated dengue is relatively rare in travelers. Clinicians should monitor patients with dengue closely for warning signs that may indicate progression to severe disease. Risk factors for developing complications of dengue in travelers need further prospective study. Primary Funding Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, International Society of Travel Medicine, Public Health Agency of Canada, and GeoSentinel Foundation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent studies demonstrate that rabies post-exposure prophylaxis (RPEP) in international travelers is suboptimal, with only 5–20% of travelers receiving rabies immune globulin (RIG) in the country of exposure when indicated. We hypothesized that travelers may not be receiving RIG appropriately, and practices may vary between countries. We aim to describe the characteristics of travelers who received RIG and/or RPEP during travel. Methodology/Principal findings: We conducted a multi-center review of international travelers exposed to potentially rabid animals, collecting information on RPEP administration. Travelers who started RPEP before (Group A) and at (Group B) presentation to a GeoSentinel clinic during September 2014–July 2017 were included. We included 920 travelers who started RPEP. About two-thirds of Group A travelers with an indication for rabies immunoglobulin (RIG) did not receive it. Travelers exposed in Indonesia were less likely to receive RIG in the country of exposure (relative risk: 0.30; 95% confidence interval: 0.12–0.73; P = 0.01). Travelers exposed in Thailand [Relative risk (RR) 1.38, 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI): 1.0–1.8; P = 0.02], Sri Lanka (RR 3.99, 95% CI: 3.99–11.9; P = 0.013), and the Philippines (RR 19.95, 95% CI: 2.5–157.2; P = 0.01), were more likely to receive RIG in the country of exposure. Conclusions/Significance: This analysis highlights gaps in early delivery of RIG to travelers and identifies specific countries where travelers may be more or less likely to receive RIG. More detailed country-level information helps inform risk education of international travelers regarding appropriate rabies prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Zika virus has spread rapidly in the Americas and has been imported into many nonendemic countries by travelers.Objective: To describe clinical manifestations and epidemiology of Zika virus disease in travelers exposed in the Americas.Design: Descriptive, using GeoSentinel records.Setting: 63 travel and tropical medicine clinics in 30 countries.Patients: Ill returned travelers with a confirmed, probable, or clinically suspected diagnosis of Zika virus disease seen between January 2013 and 29 February 2016.Measurements: Frequencies of demographic, trip, and clinical characteristics and complications.Results: Starting in May 2015, 93 cases of Zika virus disease were reported. Common symptoms included exanthema (88%), fever (76%), and arthralgia (72%). Fifty-nine percent of patients were exposed in South America; 71% were diagnosed in Europe. Case status was established most commonly by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing of blood and less often by PCR testing of other body fluids or serology and plaque-reduction neutralization testing. Two patients developed Guillain-Barré syndrome, and 3 of 4 pregnancies had adverse outcomes (microcephaly, major fetal neurologic abnormalities, and intrauterine fetal death).Limitation: Surveillance data collected by specialized clinics may not be representative of all ill returned travelers, and denominator data are unavailable.Conclusion: These surveillance data help characterize the clinical manifestations and adverse outcomes of Zika virus disease among travelers infected in the Americas and show a need for global standardization of diagnostic testing. The serious fetal complications observed in this study highlight the importance of travel advisories and prevention measures for pregnant women and their partners. Travelers are sentinels for global Zika virus circulation and may facilitate further transmission.Primary Funding Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, International Society of Travel Medicine, and Public Health Agency of Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: International travel continues to increase, particularly to Asia and Africa. Clinicians are increasingly likely to be consulted for advice before travel or by ill returned travelers. Objective: To describe typical diseases in returned travelers accord-ing to region, travel reason, and patient demographic characteris-tics; describe the pattern of low-frequency travel-associated dis-eases; and refine key messages for care before and after travel. Design: Descriptive, using GeoSentinel records. Setting: 53 tropical or travel disease units in 24 countries. Patients: 42 173 ill returned travelers seen between 2007 and 2011. Measurements: Frequencies of demographic characteristics, regions visited, and illnesses reported. Results: Asia (32.6%) and sub-Saharan Africa (26.7%) were the most common regions where illnesses were acquired. Three quar-ters of travel-related illness was due to gastrointestinal (34.0%), febrile (23.3%), and dermatologie (19.5%) diseases. Only 40.5% of all ill travelers reported pretravel medical visits. The relative frequency of many diseases varied with both travel destination and reason for travel, with travelers visiting friends and relatives in their country of origin having both a disproportionately high burden of serious febrile illness and very low rates of advice before travel (18.3%). Life-threatening diseases, such as Plasmodium falciparum malaria, melioidosis, and African trypanosomiasis, were reported. Limitations: Sentinel surveillance data collected by specialist clinics do not reflect healthy returning travelers or those with mild or self-limited illness. Data cannot be used to infer quantitative risk for illness. Conclusion: Many illnesses may have been preventable with ap-propriate advice, chemoprophylaxis, or vaccination. Clinicians can use these 5-year GeoSentinel data to help tailor more efficient pretravel preparation strategies and evaluate possible differential diagnoses of ill returned travelers according to destination and reason for travel. Primary Funding Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Measles remains a risk for travelers, with 94 measles diagnoses reported to the GeoSentinel network from 2000 to 2014, twothirds 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 catchup vaccination of susceptible adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human mobility has always been associated with the spread of infection, and mobility of nonimmigrant visitors and temporary residents to the United States is increasing, from ≈12 million in 1987 to ≈37 million in 2007. Lack of information about the health status of these populations upon arrival and their need for and use of medical services in the United States hinders development of public health policy, education, and provision of adequate clinical care. After these issues and needs are clarifi ed, intervention programs should be developed to increase access and decrease the disparities of care experienced by these populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A response from the authors of the article "Hepatitis B screening in US travelers seen at the Boston area travel medicine network," in the 2013 issue is presented.

Abstract: Vaccine preventable diseases (VPDs) threaten international travelers, but little is known about their epidemiology in this group. We analyzed records of 37,542 ill returned travelers entered into the GeoSentinel Surveillance Network database. Among 580 (1.5%) with VPDs, common diagnoses included enteric fever (n =276), acute viral hepatitis (n =148), and influenza (n =70). Factors associated with S. typhi included VFR travel (p <0.016) to South Central Asia (p <0.001). Business travel was associated with influenza (p <0.001), and longer travel with hepatitis A virus (p =0.02). 29% of those with VPDs had pre-travel consultations. At least 55% of those with VPDs were managed as inpatients, compared to 9.5% of those with non-VPDs. Three deaths occurred; one each due to pneumococcal meningitis, S. typhi, and rabies. VPDs are significant contributors to morbidity and potential mortality in travelers. High rates of hospitalization make them an attractive target for pre-travel intervention. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]