Abstract

BackgroundThe considerable malaria decline in several countries challenges the strategy of chemoprophylaxis for travellers visiting moderate- to low-risk areas. An international consensus on the best strategy is lacking. It is essential to include travellers’ opinions in the decision process. The preference of travellers regarding malaria prevention for moderate- to low-risk areas, related to their risk perception, as well as the reasons for their choices were investigated.MethodsPrior to pre-travel consultation in the Travel Clinic, a self-administered questionnaire was given to travellers visiting moderate- to low-risk malaria areas. Four preventive options were proposed to the traveller, i.e., bite prevention only, chemoprophylaxis, stand-by emergency treatment alone, and stand-by emergency treatment with rapid diagnostic test. The information was accompanied by a risk scale for incidence of malaria, anti-malarial adverse drug reactions and other travel-related risks, inspired by Paling palettes from the Risk Communication Institute.ResultsA total of 391 travellers were included from December 2012 to December 2013. Fifty-nine (15%) opted for chemoprophylaxis, 116 (30%) for stand-by emergency treatment, 112 (29%) for stand-by emergency treatment with rapid diagnostic test, 100 (26%) for bite prevention only, and four (1%) for other choices. Travellers choosing chemoprophylaxis justified their choice for security reasons (42%), better preventive action (29%), higher efficacy (15%) and easiness (15%). The reasons for choosing stand-by treatment or bite prevention only were less medication consumed (29%), less adverse drug reactions (23%) and lower price (9%). Those who chose chemoprophylaxis were more likely to have used it in the past (OR = 3.0 (CI 1.7-5.44)), but were not different in terms of demographic, travel characteristics or risk behaviour.ConclusionsWhen travelling to moderate- to low-risk malaria areas, 85% of interviewees chose not to take chemoprophylaxis as malaria prevention, although most guidelines recommend it. They had coherent reasons for their choice. New recommendations should include shared decision-making to take into account travellers’ preferences.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12936-015-0654-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Highlights

  • The considerable malaria decline in several countries challenges the strategy of chemoprophylaxis for travellers visiting moderate- to low-risk areas

  • In line with the current momentum of shared decisionmaking [18], the present study aims at better understanding travellers’ aspirations

  • A total of 428 questionnaires were collected between December 2012 and December 2013, and 391 (91%) have been included

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The considerable malaria decline in several countries challenges the strategy of chemoprophylaxis for travellers visiting moderate- to low-risk areas. The preference of travellers regarding malaria prevention for moderate- to low-risk areas, related to their risk perception, as well as the reasons for their choices were investigated. All countries agree on prescribing chemoprophylaxis for high-risk endemic regions, recommendations for moderate- to low-. To the knowledge of the authors, no study has addressed the question of what would be the travellers’ choice in terms of malaria prevention measures for moderate- to low-risk areas, should alternatives be proposed to them. The primary objective was to evaluate the personal preference of travellers visiting moderate- to low-risk malaria areas, depending on their perception of risk. The secondary objective was to investigate the reasons for their choice, and correlate it to their sociodemographic profile and risk behaviours

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call