Quality of travel health advice in higher-education establishments in the United Kingdom and its relationship to the demographic background of the provider

Integrating sexual and reproductive health into pre-travel consultations

BACKGROUND

Casual sex during travel is a major preventable factor in the global transmission of sexually transmissible infections (STI). Pre-travel consults present an excellent opportunity for practitioners to educate travellers about sexual and reproductive health (SRH) and safety. This scoping review aims to explore and understand the extent to which SRH is included in pre-travel consultations.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, Medline and Web of Science were systematically searched for primary research articles exploring whether health care practitioners (HCP) included SRH in pre-travel consultations. Extracted findings were synthesized and presented in narrative form.

RESULTS

Findings across 13 articles suggest HCPs infrequently broached SRH in pre-travel consultations with HCP discomfort, and lack of time and resources presented as key barriers. Urban practice settings, HCP experience, training in travel medicine and traveller characteristics such as sexual orientation were positively associated with discussions about SRH. SRH advice reported was general in nature, primarily focusing on safer sex, condoms or unspecified STI advice. Risk assessments based solely on age or stereotypes around sexual preferences led to key aspects of SRH care being missed for some (e.g. SRH was less likely to be discussed with older travellers).

CONCLUSIONS

HCPs frequently miss opportunities to integrate SRH into pre-travel consultations. Strategies to promote HCP confidence and awareness present a promising means to boost the frequency and quality of SRH advice disseminated. Integrating culturally safe and responsive SRH history-taking and advice into pre-travel consultations may contribute to global reductions in STI transmission and promote traveller SRH well-being.

Perspectives of primary care physicians in Spain on malaria: a cross-sectional survey and retrospective review of cases

BACKGROUND

In Spain, the risk of imported malaria has increased in recent years due to the rise in international travel and migration. Little is known about the knowledge, information sources, clinical practice, and specific needs of primary care physicians (PCPs) concerning malaria despite the pivotal role played by these professionals in managing the health of tourists. The objective of this study was to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of PCPs in Spain regarding malaria.

METHODS

This research analyses data from (1) a cross-sectional nationwide survey assessing the knowledge and attitudes of PCPs regarding malaria, and (2) a retrospective review of 373 malaria cases appearing in primary care medical records (PCMRs) in the Madrid area over the past 15 years to determine how cases were documented, managed, or characterized in the primary care setting.

RESULTS

The survey findings reveal a modest level of self-perceived familiarity with malaria (221/360, 57.6%), even though 32.8% of the practitioners reported having delivered care for confirmed or suspected cases of the disease, these practitioners had greater knowledge of malaria (80.4%) compared to physicians who reported not having delivered care for malaria (19.6%, p < 0.001). Ten percent of the survey participants did not know the name of the mosquito that transmits malaria, and only 40.7% would promptly request malaria testing for a traveller with symptoms after a trip to an endemic area. Responses provided by younger PCPs varied to a greater extent than those of their more experienced colleagues regarding prevention practices and patient management. A review of PCMRs showed that only 65% of all patients were recorded as such. Among those registered, only 40.3% had a documented malaria episode, and of those, only 16.6% received proper follow-up. Only 23.7% of the patients with a PCMR had a record that specifically indicated travel to an endemic country or travel classified as visiting friends and relatives (VFR).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study underscore the critical role of PCPs in the field of travel medicine, particularly given the increase in imported malaria cases. These results highlight the need for targeted training in travel medicine and the need to ensure optimal patient education in care settings.

Primary care physicians’ knowledge of travel vaccine and malaria chemoprophylaxis and associated predictors in Qatar

Background

In an era of globalization, travel-related illnesses have become a focus of public ‎health concern, especially in the Arab region where travel health services are insufficient and ‎not well-established. This study was conducted to assess travel vaccine and ‎malaria chemoprophylaxis knowledge and associated predictors among primary care physicians‎ (PCPs) in ‎Qatar.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study. A structured questionnaire was used to collect ‎data from all physicians working at all 27 primary healthcare centers from March 1^st to May 31^st 2020.‎ Knowledge scores were computed and a multivariable linear regression model was built to identify predictors of higher knowledge.

Results

A total of 364 PCPs participated (response rate of 89.2%). Participants’ mean ‎age was 44.5 (±7.8) with 59.1% being males. Their overall mean knowledge score was 9.54/16 (±3.24). Significant predictors of higher knowledge included: aged 40–49 years ‎(1.072; 95% CI: 0.230, 1.915)‎, had medical degree from non-Arab countries ‏‎(0.748; 95% CI: 0.065, ‎‎1.432)‎‏,‏‎ had training in TM ‏ ‏‎(1.405; 95% CI: 0.407, ‎‎2.403), and provided ≥10 consultations/ month ‎(2.585; 95% CI:1.294, 3.876)‎. Online information was the main reported resource of travel medicine consultation.

Conclusions

The overall PCPs’ mean percentage knowledge score of travel medicine was 59.6% (±20.3). A high volume of pretravel consultation, prior training, middle age group, and medical degree from non-Arab countries were significant predictors of higher ‎knowledge. Continuing ‎education and training provided by recognised international institutions for all PCPs is highly ‎recommended to narrow the gap in travel medicine knowledge.

The changing landscape of travel health services in Canada

Canadians are increasingly travelling to areas that would necessitate a pre-travel consultation. Changes in professional regulations in Canada allow greater autonomy of nurses and pharmacists, resulting in shifts in provision of travel health services. We surveyed 824 Canadian travel clinics, 270 (33%) of whom responded. Private clinics were most common, and more likely to offer extended hours and drop-in appointments. In one province, pharmacies dominated. Half the services were relatively new and a similar proportion saw fewer than 10 patients weekly; 1/3 had a single provider. The increased spectrum of services may increase convenience for travellers but the large proportion seeing low numbers of clients will challenge providers to maintain competence.

Improving access and provision of pre-travel healthcare for travellers visiting friends and relatives: a review of the evidence

BACKGROUND

Travellers visiting friends and relatives (VFR travellers) in their country of origin are at increased risk of a range of preventable infections. Risks are broadly related to circumstances of travel, risk misconceptions and access to health services. Despite nearly two decades of literature highlighting these increased risks little impact has been made on their risk disparity.

METHODS

This review draws on evidence from travel medicine literature, supplemented by evidence from the broader field of immigrant health, and is structured to include strategies that aim to reduce barriers at the patient, provider and health system level.

RESULTS

For the travel medicine provider, tailored risk communication that is cognisant of the unique health beliefs and barriers to travel health for VFR travellers is needed, including enhanced communication through the use of interpreters and supplementary written communication. Primary care providers are uniquely placed to identify future travel plans among immigrant patients, however, greater awareness of VFR traveller risks and training in travel medicine are required. Community health promotion interventions that are culturally appropriate, translated into multiple languages and takes into account the cumulative risk of multiple return visits are key to normalizing travel healthcare seeking behaviours and improving awareness of VFR travel risks. Currently, there are few examples of novel strategies to engage migrant communities in travel health with no formal evaluations of their effectiveness. Best practice includes the use of community-consulted approaches in collaboration with government, primary care and travel medicine.

CONCLUSIONS

Multifactorial barriers related to health beliefs and access to health services require a range of strategies and interventions in both reaching and providing advice to VFR travellers. To improve the evidence base, future research should focus on the evaluation of novel strategies that address these barriers and improve access and provision of pre-travel healthcare to VFR travellers.

Pretravel Health Preparation of International Travelers: Results From the Boston Area Travel Medicine Network

Objective

To inform future interventions for advising travelers.

Patients and Methods

We prospectively collected data on travelers seen at the Boston Area Travel Medicine Network, a Boston area research collaboration of 5 travel medicine clinics. Data from 15,440 travelers were collected from March 1, 2008, through July 31, 2010. We compared traveler and trip characteristics and differences in demographic characteristics and travel plans across the 5 clinics, including an analysis of pretravel preparations for certain high-risk destinations.

Results

More than half of the 15,440 travelers were female (8730 [56.5]), and 72.4% (10,528 of 14,545) were white; the median age was 34 years, and 29.4% of travelers (3077 of 10,483) were seen less than 2 weeks before their departure date. Substantial variation in racial background, purpose of travel, and destination risk existed across the 5 clinics. For example, the proportion of travelers visiting friends and relatives ranged from 7.6% (184 of 2436) to 39.0% (1029 of 2639) (18.7% [2876 of 15,360] overall), and the percentage of travelers to areas with malaria risk ranged from 23.7% (333 of 1403) to 52.0% (1306 of 2512). Although most clinics were likely to have prescribed certain vaccines for high-risk destinations (eg, yellow fever for Ghana travel), there was wide variability in influenza vaccine use for China travel.

Conclusion

Substantial differences in clinic populations can occur within a single metropolitan area, highlighting why individual physicians and travel clinics need to understand the specific needs of the travelers they serve in addition to general travel medicine.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of US practitioners who provide pre-travel advice

BACKGROUND

As international travel increases, many health care professionals are being asked to provide pre-travel advice. We designed an anonymous web-based survey to assess the extent to which primary care providers (PCPs) provide travel medicine advice and how their understanding and delivery of itinerary-specific advice and management compare with that of travel medicine specialists.

METHODS

We surveyed randomly selected US PCPs registered in the Pri-Med Institute (now pmiCME) database and US travel medicine specialists from the International Society of Travel Medicine (ISTM), American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (ASTMH), and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) yellow fever (YF) vaccine provider mailing lists. SAS software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) was used for all analyses.

RESULTS

Of 14,932 e-mails sent to valid e-mail addresses, 902 yielded complete or partially completed surveys (6.0% response rate). Eighty percent of respondents personally provided pre-travel advice (95% of travel medicine specialists versus 73% of PCPs). About two thirds of PCPs (68%) providing pre-travel consultations saw <50 travelers per year whereas 30% of travel medicine specialists saw <50 travelers per year. More travel medicine specialists (59%) than PCPs (18%) saw >500 travelers per year. Familiarity with travel-specific vaccines (YF, Japanese encephalitis) and provision of written educational materials increased as volume of travelers increased. Familiarity with antimalarial side effects and malaria resistance patterns, and knowledge scores based on brief pre-travel scenarios were higher in travel medicine specialists, ASTMH or ISTM certificate holders, and respondents who saw more pre-travel patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Many PCP survey participants provided pre-travel advice, but most saw few travelers. Volume of travelers and holding an ASTMH or ISTM certificate had the greatest influence on knowledge of travel medicine and provision of appropriate advice and recommendations. Creating easily accessible travel medicine education programs for US providers from a wide range of disciplines is needed to improve the management of travelers.

Pre-travel consultation: evaluation of primary care physician practice in the Franche-Comté region

BACKGROUND

Primary care physicians (PCP) are first in line to provide adequate pre-travel medical advice. Little data are available on the content of pre-travel PCP consultations in France. We undertook an observational survey to assess the level of specific knowledge among PCPs on health advice, vaccinations, and malaria prophylaxis.

METHODS

Standardized questionnaires were sent to a random sample of 400 PCPs practicing in the Franche-Comté regions (eastern France) who were asked to complete and return it on a voluntary and anonymous basis. The questionnaire requested sociodemographic details, practice-related characteristics, and proposed three clinical situations with multiple choice questions (MCQ). To identify factors associated with a higher level of specific knowledge in travel medicine, results were studied by uni- and multivariate analyses. An overall score was calculated based on the MCQ answers and a motivation score was calculated based on parameters such as frequency and developments in pre-travel consulting at the practice, PCPs' personal experience as travelers, and the formal agreement of PCPs to administer yellow fever vaccination.

RESULTS

The response rate was 37.5%, with 150 questionnaires returned completed and suitable for analysis. After multivariate logistic regression, the three variables associated with a higher score were: proximity of a vaccination center (p = 0.001), motivation score (p = 0.004), and absence of request for expert advice on malaria prophylaxis (p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

PCPs play an important role in travel medicine. This study showed that their high level of knowledge in travel medicine was mostly linked to their motivation to practice in this specialized discipline.

Providing travel health care--the nurses' role: an international comparison

BACKGROUND

In many countries, the responsibility for travel health lies with medical practitioners who delegate certain tasks to nursing staff. Elsewhere, nurses have taken a leading role and work independently in private or hospital-based clinics, occupational health departments and general practices. The purpose of this study was to examine the roles and challenges faced by nurses providing travel health care in Australia, Japan and the UK, and to compare educational and professional needs.

METHODS

Nurses involved in travel health care were invited to complete an online questionnaire with multiple choice, open-ended, and Likert Scale questions. SurveyMonkey's statistical facilities analysed quantitative data; thematic content analysis was applied to qualitative responses.

RESULTS

Differences and similarities between the three countries were conveyed by 474 participants focusing on current positions, work arrangements, and educational and practical concerns. Clinical practice issues, including vaccination and medication regulations, were highlighted with the differences between countries explained by the respective history of travel health care development and the involvement within their nursing profession.

CONCLUSION

The call for more educational opportunities, including more support from employers, and a refinement of the role as travel health nurse appears to be international. Nurses require support networks within the field, and the development of a specialist "travel health nurse" would give a stronger voice to their concerns and needs for specific education and training in travel health care.

Quality of travel health advice in a French travel medicine and vaccine center: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The number of international trips undertaken by French citizens is rising and we wished to assess the appropriateness of advices given to travelers in a vaccine and travel medicine center in France.

METHODS

We conducted a 3-month prospective study in one center in Paris where prescriptions and advice to travelers are given by trained physicians in travel medicine who have access to a computerized decision support system (Edisan). A questionnaire was used to record trip characteristics, patients' demographics, and prescriptions. Main outcome measure was the adequacy of prescriptions for malaria prophylaxis, yellow fever, and hepatitis A vaccines to French guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 730 subjects were enrolled in this study, with a median age of 28 years. Travel destinations were sub-Saharan Africa (58%), Asia (21%), and South America (18%). Among the 608 patients (83%) traveling to malaria-endemic areas, malaria prophylaxis was in accordance with guidelines in 578/608 patients (95.1%, 95% CI: 93-96.5), and doxycycline was the regimen of choice (48%). Inappropriate malaria prophylaxis was given to eight patients, one of whom developed plasmodium falciparum malaria. All 413 patients (100%, 95% CI: 99-100) traveling to yellow fever-endemic areas who needed vaccination were correctly vaccinated. However, three patients received yellow fever vaccination without indication. Also, 442 of 454 patients (97.4%, 95% CI: 95.4-98.5) eligible to receive hepatitis A vaccination were immunized.

CONCLUSION

Appropriate advice for malaria prophylaxis, yellow fever, and hepatitis A vaccinations was provided in a travel medicine and vaccine center where trained physicians used a computerized decision support system. Even in this setting, however, errors can occur and professional practices should be regularly assessed to improve health care.

Does registration of professionals improve the quality of travelers' health advice?

BACKGROUND

The objectives of the Dutch National Coordination Center for Travelers' Health Advice (LCR) are to improve the uniformity of travelers' health advice in the Netherlands and to enhance its quality. The LCR offers national guidelines and quality criteria, as well as a telephone consultation service, where health professionals can pose questions regarding travel medicine. Since 2005, a register for qualified travel health professionals has been in place. We studied the quality and relevance of the telephone consultations, to see whether there was a difference between registered as qualified and nonregistered health professionals.

METHODS

Telephone questions regarding pretravel advice were logged in September 2007. The questions were categorized as basic or advanced and compared by the profession of the caller, type of institution, and LCR registration of the responsible physician.

RESULTS

In 2007, 85% of travel clinic physicians, 42% of general practitioners, and 31% of travel clinic nurses were registered with the LCR. A total of 146 telephone consultations were included in the analysis. Significantly more callers from travel clinics posed advanced questions than those from general practices [odds ratio (OR) 7.6; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.6-16.1; p= 0.000]. More callers who were registered asked advanced questions, although this difference was not significant (OR 1.7; 95% CI: 0.9-3.3; p= 0.124). Assistants from general practices asked significantly less advanced questions than physicians or nurses.

CONCLUSIONS

Opening a register for travel health professionals has led to a large increase of professionals who follow courses and register as travel health professionals. A positive association was found between the quality of the questions and the registration of the responsible physician. The quality of travel health advice given in general practices needs increased attention.

Quality assessment in a travel clinic: a study of travelers' knowledge about malaria

BACKGROUND

Quality in health care delivery is considered essential and should be expected for all who deliver health care. We were not able to identify in Portugal any previous studies that assessed the quality of travel medicine consultations. The aims of this study was to assess the impact of travel health advice on travelers' knowledge and the quality of the outcome of the travel consultations at the Institute of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Portugal.

METHOD

We selected the quasi-experimental model "separate-sample pretest-posttest design." Two random samples were obtained (control and experimental groups). An anonymous self-administered questionnaire was applied during the second half of 2002, until we had received about 200 questionnaires for each group. The questions assessed travelers' knowledge of malaria, its transmission, prevention, and clinical features.

RESULTS

There was a significant improvement of travelers' knowledge in the postconsultation group, with 98.5% of individuals understanding that malaria is transmitted by mosquito bite (p= 0.005), 91.5% that malaria may be prevented by appropriate prophylactic medication (p= 0.007), and 93% knowing that malaria is prevented by avoiding mosquito bites (p= 0.003). However, almost half of the postconsultation group did not realize that there was no vaccine available for preventing malaria (p < 0.001) or that avoiding unsafe food and drink did not prevent malaria (p= 0.006). About 53% gave correct answers about malaria incubation periods (p < 0.001), and 91.1% were able to identify the initial symptoms of malaria (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Travel medicine consultations increase the knowledge base of travelers but do not achieve 100% correct answers. Our results suggest that during a travel health consultation, critical information is assimilated about the prevention of malaria, but myths and misunderstandings that are held by travelers are not completely dispelled.

High-risk travel abroad overtook low-risk travel from 1999 to 2004: characterization and trends in 2,622 Spanish travelers

BACKGROUND

Travel medicine in Spain is provided by a few specialized centers that do not come under the auspices of the main health system. Some kind of reform is required to avoid common summer collapses and postponements of the service. In contrast to other European countries, neither the exact role nor the responsibilities of general practitioners and primary health care in travel medicine are clearly defined.

METHODS

An observational study was performed with retrospective data concerning 2,622 travelers from 1999 to 2004. Although the study was performed at a third-level travel medicine center, continuous contact with and support to general practitioners was maintained throughout the period.

RESULTS

International travel was a steadily increasing reality between 1999 and 2004 despite well-known tragic events involving world safety. The number of high-risk travels (53.4%) also increased and even overtook low-risk ones (46.6%). This trend was explained as the result of an increasing number of journeys to sub-Saharan Africa (14.9%) and those made by traveling immigrants (64.1% of those journeys), which represented a significantly higher proportion of high-risk travels compared with those made by autochthonous subjects (52.1%; p < .001). Moreover, traveling immigrants tend to consult more frequently in periods < 15 days prior to travel than do autochthonous travelers (p < .0001). A substantial number of highly vulnerable travelers, such as pregnant women, infants, elderly people, and immunosuppressed subjects, was found (1.8%). Low-risk travelers who could have been advised and vaccinated by general practitioners were 1,139 (43.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the increasing number of travelers undertaking high-risk travels abroad, any kind of reinforcement of travel medicine provision in Spain should be considered essential. General practitioners could attend to a significant proportion of low-risk travelers.