Search

Zika virus has recently been introduced to the Americas and is spreading rapidly. We evaluated the characteristics of US travelers to Zika virus-affected countries who were seen at Global TravEpiNet sites during March 2015-October 2016. Nearly three quarters of travelers were men or women of reproductive age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People who travel to areas with high rabies endemicity and have animal contact are at increased risk for rabies exposure. We examined characteristics of international travelers queried regarding rabies vaccination during pretravel consultations at Global TravEpiNet (GTEN) practices during 2009-2010. Material and Methods: We performed bivariate and multivariable analyses of data collected from 18 GTEN clinics. Travel destinations were classified by strength level of rabies vaccination recommendation. Results: Of 13,235 travelers, 226 (2%) reported previous rabies vaccination, and 406 (3%) received rabies vaccine at the consultation. Common travel purposes for these 406 travelers were leisure (26%), research/education (17%), and nonmedical service work (14%). Excluding the 226 who were previously vaccinated, 8070 (62%) of 13,009 travelers intended to visit one or more countries with a strong recommendation for rabies vaccination; 1675 (21%) of these 8070 intended to travel for 1 month or more. Among these 1675 travelers, 145 (9%) were vaccinated, 498 (30%) declined vaccination, 832 (50%) had itineraries that clinicians determined did not indicate vaccination, and 200 (12%) remained unvaccinated for other reasons. In both bivariate and multivariate analyses, travelers with trip durations >6 months versus 1-3 months (adjusted odds ratio [OR]=4.9 [95% confidence interval [CI] 2.1, 11.4]) and those traveling for 'research/education' or to 'provide medical care' (adjusted OR=5.1 [95% CI 1.9, 13.7] and 9.5 [95% CI 2.2, 40.8], respectively), compared with leisure travelers, were more likely to receive rabies vaccination. Conclusions: Few travelers at GTEN clinics received rabies vaccine, although many planned trips 1 month long or more to a strong-recommendation country. Clinicians often determined that vaccine was not indicated, and travelers often declined vaccine when it was offered. The decision to vaccinate should take into account the strength of the vaccine recommendation at the destination country, duration of stay, availability of postexposure prophylaxis, potential for exposure to animals, and likelihood of recurrent travel to high-risk destinations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Costs and benefits of malaria prevention are provided during domestic pretravel health consultations. Healthcare payers always, and travelers often, save money when travelers adhere to malaria recommendations and prophylactic regimens in West Africa, especially for longer durations of travel.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. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]