Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Malaria Prophylaxis (malaria + prophylaxis)
Selected AbstractsSide Effects of and Compliance with Malaria Prophylaxis in ChildrenJOURNAL OF TRAVEL MEDICINE, Issue 6 2002Theresa A. Albright Background: We wanted to determine the frequency of side effects and compliance with mefloquine and chloroquine used for antimalarial prophylaxis in children 0 to 13 years compared with side effects in same-age children taking prophylactic chloroquine. Methods: Subjects and treatment were identified by retrospective medical record review for children , 13 years not on other medications who visited a travel clinic between November 1997 and January 2000. Parents were interviewed via telephone in January through March 2000 regarding compliance and side effects. Results: We reviewed 286 records and contacted 190 of 286 parents (66%). Of these, 177 (93%) parents had first-hand knowledge about the child's compliance with the medication regimen and were interviewed. Subjects were 47% male (median age 6.3 years), contacted a median of 12.4 months (range 2.8 to 28 months) following their clinic visit. Of these, 148 (84%) were prescribed mefloquine, and 29, chloroquine with 77% (136/177) taking the prescribed antimalarial. Most children (30 of 41 [73%]) not receiving their prophylaxis traveled unprotected to endemic area. Sixteen subjects (12% of those taking antimalarials) reported side effects. Eleven of 115 subjects (10%) who took mefloquine, and 5 of 22 subjects (23%) who took chloroquine reported a side effect. Side effects for mefloquine included diarrhea, anorexia, vivid dreams, headache, changes in sleep, hallucinations, and vomiting with 2 subjects stopping mefloquine after seeking medical care. Side effects for chloroquine were headache, nausea, and changes in sleep. No child stopped taking chloroquine. Groups reporting or not reporting a side effect were similar for gender, age, travel destination, antimalarial prescribed, and elapsed time from clinic visit to telephone contact. Conclusions: Side effects from antimalarial drug administration occurred in 10 to 23% of patients who took their medication but rarely resulted in stopping prophylaxis. Prescribed antimalarials were sometimes never given. Appropriate counseling on side effects and reasons for faithful administration should accompany antimalarial prophylaxis. [source] Cytochrome P450 CYP2C19 genotypes in Nigerian sickle-cell disease patients and normal controlsJOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACY & THERAPEUTICS, Issue 4 2010C. P. Babalola PhD Summary Background and objective:, Subjects with different CYP2C19 genotypes may metabolize proguanil, a pro-drug used for malaria prophylaxis differently and the frequency of the different alleles may be different in patients with sickle-cell disease (SCD) and normal controls. The objective of this study was to evaluate CYP2C19 *1, *2 and *3 allele and genotype frequencies in Nigerian normal controls and SCD patients, and to further compare variant CYP2C19 frequencies in Nigerians with other African populations. Methods:, Genotyping was carried out with PCR and restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis. Results and discussion:, CYP2C19 *1 (84·3 vs. 84·9%) or *2 allele frequency (15·7 vs. 15·1%) was not significantly different between patients with SCD and normal subjects. No *3 allele was detected in the cohort. The SCD group exhibited a statistically significantly lower frequency of *1/*1 genotype (69·6%) compared with normal controls (74·4%). Frequency of *2/*2 was significantly lower in SCD (0·9%) compared with normal controls (4·7%). Frequencies of *1/*2 (29·6 vs. 20·9%) were no different in SCD and normal controls. Conclusion:, Prevalence of CYP2C19 polymorphisms was defined for the first time in Nigerian normal and SCD populations. Nigerian SCD patients exhibited significantly lower CYP2C19 *1/*1 and *2/*2 frequencies than normal controls. No differences were detected in CYP2C19 allele or genotype frequencies in normal subjects between this study and previous reports in other African populations. [source] Assessment of Adherence to Atovaquone-Proguanil Prophylaxis in TravelersJOURNAL OF TRAVEL MEDICINE, Issue 4 2010John C. DePetrillo MD Background. Malaria continues to be a serious, world-wide infection. Atovaquone-proguanil is one of the prophylactic agents recommended for travelers to endemic regions. However, little information is available regarding adherence with this medication. A large proportion of malaria cases reported from travelers is due to non-adherence to prescribed regimens. This study was undertaken to analyze adherence with atovaquone-proguanil prophylaxis and specific factors contributing to non-adherence. Methods. Men and non-pregnant women ,18 years of age were eligible for inclusion. Enrolled travelers received a prescription for atovaquone-proguanil prophylaxis and were contacted by telephone within 3 weeks of return to the United States. A questionnaire was prepared by the authors to determine if subjects were adherent with the medication. Additional data included demographics, duration of malarious travel, previous use of prophylactic agents, underlying medical conditions, concurrent medications, and reasons for non-adherence. Results. Complete data were available for 104/124 (84%) participants: 49 (47%) men, 55 (53%) women. Average duration of malarious travel was 12 days, and 19 (18%) travelers reported previous travel to a malarious region. Ninety-two (89%) subjects were completely adherent with their prophylactic atovaquone-proguanil course. Adverse effects were seen in 6 (5%) travelers. Conclusions. Adherence with atovaquone-proguanil malaria prophylaxis is high among travelers from a non-endemic region. Adverse effects are minimal. Non-adherence was primarily attributable to travelers' perception of need. [source] Factors Influencing Standard Pretravel Health Advice,A Study in BelgiumJOURNAL OF TRAVEL MEDICINE, Issue 5 2007Kristina Van De Winkel MD Background Travelers with risk factors, medical conditions such as immunosuppression, medication intake, pregnancy, or elderly age, need adaptation or reinforcement of pretravel health advice. The literature provides little data on the frequency of these risk groups in the travel population. This study intended to investigate whether risk factors influencing standard travel advice are common in the population attending our travel clinic. Methods A prospective survey was carried out over a 2-month period in 2004 at the travel clinic of the Institute for Tropical Medicine in Antwerp, Belgium. A list of risk factors focused on the following three important advice categories: malaria prophylaxis, yellow fever vaccination, and travelers' diarrhea or other enteric infections. We counted how frequently a risk factor was observed for each advice category (potential influence) and, after considering the travel characteristics, how often a real adaptation of advice was necessary (actual influence). Results Of 2,227 travelers, 276 were found to have a possible influencing factor (12.4%). The potential influence was 10.9% (243/2,227) for malaria prophylaxis advice, 6.1% (136/2,227) for yellow fever vaccination, and 1.9% (43/2,227) for travelers' diarrhea advice. The actual influence was lower 8% (184/2,227), 5% (109/2,227), and 1.2% (27/2,227), respectively. The main interfering factors were as follows: for influence on malaria advice, age ,60 years (44%) and neuropsychiatric disorders (15.6%); for yellow fever vaccination, age ,60 years (63.2%) and immunosuppression (10.3%); and for influence on travelers' diarrhea advice, decreased gastric acidity (44.2%) and immunosuppression (32.6%). Conclusion Travelers with risk factors are not infrequently seen at our travel clinic. Some groups are more prominently present and could be the focus of travel group,specific instructions. The study suggests that being informed about risk groups is essential for advising travelers. [source] Problems and Risks of Unsolicited E-mails in Patient-Physician Encounters in Travel Medicine SettingsJOURNAL OF TRAVEL MEDICINE, Issue 3 2001Andreas Sing Background: International travel and use of modern information technology are expressions of modern life style. Seeking on-line travel health advice via E-mail for preventive (teleprevention) or diagnostic reasons may become increasingly popular among patients with financial resources and Internet access. This study was undertaken to compare the behavior of travel clinic or tropical medicine physicians and other providers of travel-related medical information services toward unsolicited E-mails from fictitious patients in pretravel and post-travel scenarios. We also wanted to test the potential of E-mail advice for preventive medicine (teleprevention), and to find out how the "Good Samaritan Law" is observed. Methods: Two different E-mails were posted to E-mail addresses of 171 physicians (members of travel health and/or tropical medicine societies) and services offering advice on travel health issues identified by an AltaVista search. These E-mails, from two different fictitious travelers, were asking for advice regarding malaria prophylaxis in a pretravel scenario and describing symptoms suggesting acute malaria. Results: Of the contacted addresses 43.3% and 49.7% respectively, replied to the pre- and post-travel E-mail. Of those suggesting antimalarial chemoprophylaxis in the pretravel scenario, 13.2% proposed inadequate regimens, and at least 3.5% of the post-travel replies were inappropriate. The "Good Samaritan Law" was observed by a significant number of physicians. Conclusions: Both patients and physicians have to be aware of the limitations of E-mail communication. Guidelines protecting physicians against legal and ethical consequences of this new communication technology are urgently needed. [source] | ||||||||||