Cargando…

1383. Malaria Prophylaxis Use In a Travel Clinic, How Are We Doing?

BACKGROUND: Malaria chemoprophylaxis is indicated for travelers going to geographic areas designated as endemic for malaria. Often persons traveling to their native countries where malaria is present consider themselves immune and decline chemoprophylaxis. This study aimed to evaluate malaria chemop...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hogan, Dennis, Bishburg, Eliahu, Suryadevara, Madhu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10677918/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad500.1220
_version_ 1785150243194535936
author Hogan, Dennis
Bishburg, Eliahu
Suryadevara, Madhu
author_facet Hogan, Dennis
Bishburg, Eliahu
Suryadevara, Madhu
author_sort Hogan, Dennis
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Malaria chemoprophylaxis is indicated for travelers going to geographic areas designated as endemic for malaria. Often persons traveling to their native countries where malaria is present consider themselves immune and decline chemoprophylaxis. This study aimed to evaluate malaria chemoprophylaxis utilization in a travel clinic and whether it is correlated with the patient’s native place. METHODS: A retrospective study of patients attending a travel clinic between 2021 to 2023. Data were extracted on demographics, trip destinations, trip duration, and, malaria chemoprophylaxis prescribed. Pharmacies were contacted to verify prescription filling. Patients admitted with malaria were analyzed at the same time period. Comparison between groups was made using a chi-square test. p < 0.05 is considered significant. RESULTS: One hundred patients were included. Median age 55.5 years (21-80). 62 % (62) were females while 38% were males. There were ninety-four 94 travelers to Africa, 6 to South America, and 1 to Asia. Of the travelers, 44 were US natives while 56 were non-US natives. The median trip duration was 14 and 15 days among US and non-US natives respectively. All 100 patients received prescriptions for malaria prophylaxis: Atovaquone/Proguanil was prescribed to 94, while 6 were given mefloquine. Of the 100 prescriptions, 58 were filled. Of the 44 travelers who were US natives,33/44 (75 %) filled their prescriptions. Among the 56 non-US natives, 25/56 (44 %) filled prescriptions, p -0.002. During the study period, 10 patients (6 females and 4 males) were admitted with a diagnosis of malaria in returning travelers, median age of 54.5 years. The median trip duration was 19 days. All were non-US natives returning from Africa (Nigeria, Ghana, Guinea, and Mali). Only 1/10 patients took mefloquine chemoprophylaxis. All the patients were treated successfully without sequelae. CONCLUSION: In our travel clinic malaria chemoprophylaxis was prescribed to all patients as indicated, US native patients filled their prescriptions significantly more than nonnative patients. Malaria in returning travelers was diagnosed exclusively in non-US natives who did not take malaria chemoprophylaxis. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10677918
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106779182023-11-27 1383. Malaria Prophylaxis Use In a Travel Clinic, How Are We Doing? Hogan, Dennis Bishburg, Eliahu Suryadevara, Madhu Open Forum Infect Dis Abstract BACKGROUND: Malaria chemoprophylaxis is indicated for travelers going to geographic areas designated as endemic for malaria. Often persons traveling to their native countries where malaria is present consider themselves immune and decline chemoprophylaxis. This study aimed to evaluate malaria chemoprophylaxis utilization in a travel clinic and whether it is correlated with the patient’s native place. METHODS: A retrospective study of patients attending a travel clinic between 2021 to 2023. Data were extracted on demographics, trip destinations, trip duration, and, malaria chemoprophylaxis prescribed. Pharmacies were contacted to verify prescription filling. Patients admitted with malaria were analyzed at the same time period. Comparison between groups was made using a chi-square test. p < 0.05 is considered significant. RESULTS: One hundred patients were included. Median age 55.5 years (21-80). 62 % (62) were females while 38% were males. There were ninety-four 94 travelers to Africa, 6 to South America, and 1 to Asia. Of the travelers, 44 were US natives while 56 were non-US natives. The median trip duration was 14 and 15 days among US and non-US natives respectively. All 100 patients received prescriptions for malaria prophylaxis: Atovaquone/Proguanil was prescribed to 94, while 6 were given mefloquine. Of the 100 prescriptions, 58 were filled. Of the 44 travelers who were US natives,33/44 (75 %) filled their prescriptions. Among the 56 non-US natives, 25/56 (44 %) filled prescriptions, p -0.002. During the study period, 10 patients (6 females and 4 males) were admitted with a diagnosis of malaria in returning travelers, median age of 54.5 years. The median trip duration was 19 days. All were non-US natives returning from Africa (Nigeria, Ghana, Guinea, and Mali). Only 1/10 patients took mefloquine chemoprophylaxis. All the patients were treated successfully without sequelae. CONCLUSION: In our travel clinic malaria chemoprophylaxis was prescribed to all patients as indicated, US native patients filled their prescriptions significantly more than nonnative patients. Malaria in returning travelers was diagnosed exclusively in non-US natives who did not take malaria chemoprophylaxis. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures Oxford University Press 2023-11-27 /pmc/articles/PMC10677918/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad500.1220 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Abstract
Hogan, Dennis
Bishburg, Eliahu
Suryadevara, Madhu
1383. Malaria Prophylaxis Use In a Travel Clinic, How Are We Doing?
title 1383. Malaria Prophylaxis Use In a Travel Clinic, How Are We Doing?
title_full 1383. Malaria Prophylaxis Use In a Travel Clinic, How Are We Doing?
title_fullStr 1383. Malaria Prophylaxis Use In a Travel Clinic, How Are We Doing?
title_full_unstemmed 1383. Malaria Prophylaxis Use In a Travel Clinic, How Are We Doing?
title_short 1383. Malaria Prophylaxis Use In a Travel Clinic, How Are We Doing?
title_sort 1383. malaria prophylaxis use in a travel clinic, how are we doing?
topic Abstract
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10677918/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad500.1220
work_keys_str_mv AT hogandennis 1383malariaprophylaxisuseinatravelclinichowarewedoing
AT bishburgeliahu 1383malariaprophylaxisuseinatravelclinichowarewedoing
AT suryadevaramadhu 1383malariaprophylaxisuseinatravelclinichowarewedoing