|
pubmed:abstractText |
The risk of malaria for travelers varies from region to region and depends on the intensity of transmission, the duration of the stay in the area of endemicity, the style of travel, and the efficacy of preventive measures. The decision to recommend chemoprophylaxis to travelers to areas with a low risk of malarial infection is especially difficult because the risk of infection must be balanced with the risk of experiencing side effects. If the risk of side effects by far exceeds the risk of infection, the traveler needs information on measures against mosquito bites and advice on prompt diagnosis and self-treatment. The risk is difficult to quantify, and the absolute risk for travelers to most areas is not known, especially because the populations at risk are unknown. We propose here that the best approximation of the risk to the traveler to a specific area is to use the risk to the indigenous population as a guideline for the risk to the traveler, and we provide examples on how risk in the indigenous population can be used for the estimation of risk of malarial infection for travelers. Special groups are long-term visitors and residents, who often perceive risk differently, cease using chemoprophylaxis, and rely on self-diagnosis and treatment. For long-term visitors, the problem of fake drugs needs to be discussed. Strategies for chemoprophylaxis and self-treatment of pregnant women and small children are discussed. So far, malaria prophylaxis is recommended to prevent Plasmodium falciparum infections, and primaquine prophylaxis against persistent Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium ovale infections in travelers is not recommended.
|
|
pubmed:affiliation |
University of Zurich Centre for Travel Medicine, WHO Collaborating Centre for Travellers' Health, Institute for Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
|
