Suppr超能文献

前往尼泊尔旅行者的化学预防用药与疟疾风险

Chemoprophylaxis use and the risk of malaria in travelers to Nepal.

作者信息

Cave William, Pandey Prativa, Osrin David, Shlim David R

机构信息

CIWEC Clinic Travel Medicine Center, PO Box 12895, Kathmandu, Nepal.

出版信息

J Travel Med. 2003 Mar-Apr;10(2):100-5. doi: 10.2310/7060.2003.31761.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Malaria transmission in Nepal is focal and seasonal. Based on data in returning travelers the risk of malaria is low. Sources of advice give contradictory information regarding the need for chemoprophylaxis. As a result, a degree of confusion exists among visitors. The aim of this study was to describe chemoprophylactic practices among travelers to Nepal and to document differences in advice according to its source and the country in which it was given.

METHODS

A questionnaire survey of tourists attending the CIWEC Clinic Travel Medicine Center, Kathmandu between June 2000 and May 2001. Resident expatriates and indigenous Nepalese were excluded.

RESULTS

Completed questionnaires were obtained from 1,303 respondents. Two hundred and eighty-eight respondents were taking chemoprophylaxis specifically for their trip to Nepal (22%), whereas 958 were not. Travelers from the United Kingdom and Denmark were significantly more likely, and those from the United States and Germany significantly less likely, to be taking chemoprophylaxis. Most travelers sought pretravel advice (71%), and all sources were more likely to advise them not to take chemoprophylaxis than to take it. However, travelers advised by a family practitioner were significantly more likely to be taking chemoprophylaxis than those advised by a travel medicine specialist. Of those taking chemoprophylaxis, 53% were doing so for a visit to the Terai alone, 33% for all areas of Nepal, and 6% for the Kathmandu Valley. Nine different chemoprophylactic regimes were in use. Six hundred and forty respondents who were not taking chemoprophylaxis had been advised that it was not necessary; 276 had made the choice themselves; and 131 had been taking chemoprophylaxis but had stopped while in Nepal. Twenty-eight of these respondents had stopped because of side effects. The most common reason for choosing not to take chemoprophylaxis was either the occurrence of side effects or the fear of them (31%).

CONCLUSIONS

The variable and ultimately low risk of contracting malaria in Nepal has resulted in a lack of consensus and a wide range of opinion regarding the need for chemoprophylaxis. There is a need for clarification and tighter definition of the malaria risk faced by travelers to Nepal to avoid unnecessary chemoprophylaxis use while protecting those at significant risk.

摘要

背景

尼泊尔的疟疾传播具有局部性和季节性。根据归国旅行者的数据,疟疾风险较低。不同的建议来源对于化学预防必要性给出了相互矛盾的信息。因此,旅行者中存在一定程度的困惑。本研究的目的是描述前往尼泊尔的旅行者的化学预防措施,并记录根据建议来源及其给出国家的不同而产生的建议差异。

方法

对2000年6月至2001年5月间在加德满都CIWEC诊所旅行医学中心就诊的游客进行问卷调查。常住外派人员和尼泊尔本地人被排除在外。

结果

共获得1303名受访者填写的问卷。288名受访者(22%)专门针对前往尼泊尔的行程采取了化学预防措施,而958名受访者未采取。来自英国和丹麦的旅行者采取化学预防措施的可能性显著更高,而来自美国和德国的旅行者可能性显著更低。大多数旅行者在旅行前寻求建议(71%),所有建议来源建议他们不采取化学预防措施的可能性都高于建议采取的可能性。然而,家庭医生给出建议的旅行者采取化学预防措施的可能性显著高于旅行医学专家给出建议的旅行者。在采取化学预防措施的人中,53%仅在前往特莱地区时采取,33%在尼泊尔所有地区都采取,6%在加德满都谷地采取。使用了9种不同的化学预防方案。640名未采取化学预防措施的受访者被告知没有必要;276名是自行做出的选择;131名曾采取化学预防措施但在尼泊尔期间停止了。这些受访者中有28名因副作用而停止。不采取化学预防措施最常见的原因是出现副作用或担心出现副作用(31%)。

结论

尼泊尔感染疟疾的风险多变且最终较低,导致在化学预防必要性方面缺乏共识且意见分歧很大。有必要明确并更严格地界定前往尼泊尔的旅行者面临的疟疾风险,以避免不必要地使用化学预防措施,同时保护面临重大风险的人群。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验