24
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Travelers’ health problems and behavior: prospective study with post-travel follow-up

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The annual number of international tourist arrivals has recently exceeded one billion, yet surprisingly few studies have characterized travelers’ behavior, illness, and risk factors in a prospective setting. Particularly scarce are surveys of data spanning travel, return, and follow-up of the same cohort.

          This study examines behavior and illness among travelers while abroad, after return home, and at follow-up. Patterns of behavior connected to type of travel and illness are characterized so as to identify risk factors and provide background data for pre-travel advice.

          Methods

          Volunteers to this prospective cohort study were recruited at visits to a travel clinic prior to departure. Data on the subjects’ health and behavior were collected by questionnaires before and after journeys and over a three-week follow-up. In addition, the subjects were asked to fill in health diaries while traveling.

          Results

          The final study population consisted of 460 subjects, 79 % of whom reported illness during travel or on arrival: 69 % had travelers’ diarrhea (TD), 17 % skin problems, 17 % fever, 12 % vomiting, 8 % respiratory tract infection, 4 % urinary tract infection, 2 % ear infection, 4 % gastrointestinal complaints other than TD or vomiting, and 4 % other symptoms. Of all subjects, 10 % consulted a doctor and 0.7 % were hospitalized; 18 % took antimicrobials, with TD as the most common indication (64 %). Ongoing symptoms were reported by 25 % of all travelers upon return home.

          During the three-week follow-up (return rate 51 %), 32 % of respondents developed new-onset symptoms, 20 % visited a doctor and 1.7 % were hospitalized.

          Factors predisposing to health problems were identified by multivariable analysis: certain regions (Southern Asia, South-Eastern Asia, and Eastern Africa), female gender, young age, and long travel duration.

          Conclusions

          Despite proper preventive measures like vaccinations, malaria prophylaxis, and travel advice, the majority of our subjects fell ill during or after travel. As the symptoms mostly remained mild, health care services were seldom needed. Typical traveler profiles were identified, thereby providing a tool for pre-travel advice. The finding that one third reported new-onset illness during follow-up attests to the importance of advising clients on potential post-travel health problems already during pre-travel visits.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12879-016-1682-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references43

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Spectrum of disease and relation to place of exposure among ill returned travelers.

          Approximately 8 percent of travelers to the developing world require medical care during or after travel. Current understanding of morbidity profiles among ill returned travelers is based on limited data from the 1980s. Thirty GeoSentinel sites, which are specialized travel or tropical-medicine clinics on six continents, contributed clinician-based sentinel surveillance data for 17,353 ill returned travelers. We compared the frequency of occurrence of each diagnosis among travelers returning from six developing regions of the world. Significant regional differences in proportionate morbidity were detected in 16 of 21 broad syndromic categories. Among travelers presenting to GeoSentinel sites, systemic febrile illness without localizing findings occurred disproportionately among those returning from sub-Saharan Africa or Southeast Asia, acute diarrhea among those returning from south central Asia, and dermatologic problems among those returning from the Caribbean or Central or South America. With respect to specific diagnoses, malaria was one of the three most frequent causes of systemic febrile illness among travelers from every region, although travelers from every region except sub-Saharan Africa and Central America had confirmed or probable dengue more frequently than malaria. Among travelers returning from sub-Saharan Africa, rickettsial infection, primarily tick-borne spotted fever, occurred more frequently than typhoid or dengue. Travelers from all regions except Southeast Asia presented with parasite-induced diarrhea more often than with bacterial diarrhea. When patients present to specialized clinics after travel to the developing world, travel destinations are associated with the probability of the diagnosis of certain diseases. Diagnostic approaches and empiric therapies can be guided by these destination-specific differences. Copyright 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Antimicrobials Increase Travelers' Risk of Colonization by Extended-Spectrum Betalactamase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae

            Colonized travelers contribute to the pandemic spread of resistant intestinal bacteria. This study is the first to show that antimicrobial use during travel predisposes to colonization by intestinal extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae. Travelers refrain from taking unnecessary antibiotics.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Low quality of routine microscopy for malaria at different levels of the health system in Dar es Salaam

              Background Laboratory capacity to confirm malaria cases in Tanzania is low and presumptive treatment of malaria is being practiced widely. In malaria endemic areas WHO now recommends systematic laboratory testing when suspecting malaria. Currently, the use of Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDTs) is recommended for the diagnosis of malaria in lower level peripheral facilities, but not in health centres and hospitals. In this study, the following parameters were evaluated: (1) the quality of routine microscopy, and (2) the effects of RDT implementation on the positivity rate of malaria test results at three levels of the health system in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Methods During a baseline cross-sectional survey, routine blood slides were randomly picked from 12 urban public health facilities in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Sensitivity and specificity of routine slides were assessed against expert microscopy. In March 2007, following training of health workers, RDTs were introduced in nine public health facilities (three hospitals, three health centres and three dispensaries) in a near-to-programmatic way, while three control health facilities continued using microscopy. The monthly malaria positivity rates (PR) recorded in health statistics registers were collected before (routine microscopy) and after (routine RDTs) the intervention in all facilities. Results At baseline, 53% of blood slides were reported as positive by the routine laboratories, whereas only 2% were positive by expert microscopy. Sensitivity of routine microscopy was 71.4% and specificity was 47.3%. Positive and negative predictive values were 2.8% and 98.7%, respectively. Median parasitaemia was only three parasites per 200 white blood cells (WBC) by routine microscopy compared to 1226 parasites per 200 WBC by expert microscopy. Before RDT implementation, the mean test positivity rates using routine microscopy were 43% in hospitals, 62% in health centres and 58% in dispensaries. After RDT implementation, mean positivity rates using routine RDTs were 6%, 7% and 8%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of RDTs using expert microscopy as reference were 97.0% and 96.8%. The positivity rate of routine microscopy remained the same in the three control facilities: 71% before versus 72% after. Two cross-sectional health facility surveys confirmed that the parasite rate in febrile patients was low in Dar es Salaam during both the rainy season (13.6%) and the dry season (3.3%). Conclusions The quality of routine microscopy was poor in all health facilities, regardless of their level. Over-diagnosis was massive, with many false positive results reported as very low parasitaemia (1 to 5 parasites per 200 WBC). RDTs should replace microscopy as first-line diagnostic tool for malaria in all settings, especially in hospitals where the potential for saving lives is greatest.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                katri.vilkman@helsinki.fi
                sari.pakkanen@helsinki.fi
                tinja.laaveri@hus.fi
                heli.siikamaki@hus.fi
                anu.kantele@hus.fi
                Journal
                BMC Infect Dis
                BMC Infect. Dis
                BMC Infectious Diseases
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2334
                13 July 2016
                13 July 2016
                2016
                : 16
                : 328
                Affiliations
                [ ]Department of Bacteriology and Immunology, University of Helsinki, Haartmaninkatu 3, (P.O. Box 21), 00014 Helsinki, Finland
                [ ]Inflammation Center, Clinic of Infectious Diseases, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Aurora Hospital, Nordenskiöldinkatu 20, (P.O. Box 348), Helsinki, Finland
                [ ]Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
                [ ]Aava Travel Clinic, Medical Centre Aava, Annankatu 32, 00100 Helsinki, Finland
                [ ]Unit of Infectious Diseases, Solna, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 76 Stockholm, Sweden
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0004-1000
                Article
                1682
                10.1186/s12879-016-1682-0
                4944265
                27412525
                9aa4841c-821a-46ce-8bcc-3918be384910
                © The Author(s). 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 6 January 2016
                : 20 June 2016
                Funding
                Funded by: Finnish Governmental Subsidy for Health Science Research
                Funded by: Scandinavian Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy Foundation
                Award ID: 1
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                travel,travelers’ health,travelers’ behavior,travelers’ diarrhea,malaria,antimalarials,risk factors,vaccinations,antimicrobials

                Comments

                Comment on this article