Carme B, Peguet C, Nevez G
Service de Parasitologie et Mycologie, CHU d'Amiens, France.
Trop Med Int Health. 1997 Oct;2(10):953-6. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-3156.1997.d01-153.x.
To compare the compliance with and tolerance of mefloquine (MQ) and chloroquine + proguanil (CQ-PRO) chemoprophylaxis, we conducted a study using a self-reported questionnaire in 2 groups of native French adult visitors to Senegal or Kenya. CQ (100 mg daily) + PRO (200 mg daily) prophylaxis was prescribed for all patients travelling to Senegal and for those going to Kenya when MQ was contraindicated; MQ (250 mg weekly) was prescribed for the other subjects. There were no significant differences in age, sex, exposition and measures of protection against mosquito bites, concomitant drug use or mean duration of chemoprophylaxis between the 2 groups, and compliance during travel was excellent in both. Chemoprophylaxis was more frequently interrupted prematurely in the MQ group. The rates of overall side-effects attributed to malaria chemoprophylaxis were 16% for MQ against 12% CQ-PRO (not significant). However, nonserious neuropsychiatric adverse events are more frequent with MQ: 11.5% compared to 2% with CQ-PRO. MQ should be used with caution.
为比较甲氟喹(MQ)和氯喹+氯胍(CQ-PRO)化学预防的依从性和耐受性,我们对两组前往塞内加尔或肯尼亚的法国成年本土游客进行了一项使用自我报告问卷的研究。所有前往塞内加尔的患者以及当MQ禁忌时前往肯尼亚的患者,均采用CQ(每日100毫克)+PRO(每日200毫克)进行预防;其他受试者采用MQ(每周250毫克)进行预防。两组在年龄、性别、暴露情况、防蚊措施、合并用药情况或化学预防的平均持续时间方面无显著差异,且两组在旅行期间的依从性均极佳。在MQ组中,化学预防更频繁地过早中断。归因于疟疾化学预防的总体副作用发生率,MQ组为16%,CQ-PRO组为12%(无显著差异)。然而,非严重的神经精神不良事件在MQ组中更常见:为11.5%,而CQ-PRO组为2%。使用MQ时应谨慎。