ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Imported diseases recorded in the European Union (EU) increasingly involve traveling immigrants returning from visits to their relatives and friends (VFR). Children of these immigrant families can represent a population of extreme vulnerability. METHODS: A randomized cross-sectional study of 698 traveling children under the age of 15 was performed. VFR traveling children and non-VFR (or tourist) children groups were compared. RESULTS: A total of 698 individuals were analyzed: 354 males (50.7%) and 344 females (49.3%), with a median age (interquartile range) of 4 (2-9) years. Of these, 578 (82.8%) had been born in the EU with 542 (77.7%) being considered as VFR, whereas 156 (22.3%) were considered tourists. VFR children were younger (4.7 vs 8.2 yr; p < 0.001), they had more frequently been born in the EU (62.8% vs 20.1%; p < 0.01) and were more frequently lodged in private homes (76.6% vs 3.2%: p < 0.001) and rural areas (23.2% vs 1.6%; p < 0.001). Furthermore, VFR remained abroad longer (51.6 vs 16.6 d; p < 0.001), the visit/travel time interval was shorter (21.8 vs 32.2 d; p < 0.001) than tourists, and consultation was within 10 days prior to the departure (26.4% vs 2.7%; p < 0.001). The risk factor most differentiating VFR children from tourists was accommodation in a rural setting [odds ratio(OR) = 5.26;95%CI = 2.704-10.262;p < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: VFR traveling children showed a greater risk of exposure to infectious diseases compared with tourists. Immigrant families may represent a target group to prioritize international preventive activities.
Subject(s)
Communicable Diseases/epidemiology , Friends/ethnology , Malaria/epidemiology , Travel , Vaccination/trends , Adolescent , Child , Child, Preschool , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Malaria/prevention & control , Male , Morbidity/trends , Odds Ratio , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Spain/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Desde 2005, los países de África Oriental ya no exigen a los viajeros procedentes de la Unión Europea la certificación internacional de vacunación contra la fiebre amarilla. Ello es debido a la ausencia de casos de enfermedad en el área desde 2003.No obstante, se pueden esgrimir muchos argumentos a favor y en contra de su recomendación según se primen riesgos individuales de efectos secundarios de la vacuna o riesgos de salud pública debidos a no vacunar. En conjunto, el riesgo de enfermedad actualmente permanece muy bajo aunque su potencialidad epidémica es desconocida. En las poblaciones de mayor riesgo de efectos secundarios vacunales, especialmente viajeros de > 60 años, parece razonable una indicación cuidadosa e individualizable (AU)
Since 2005 the countries of Eastern Africa no longer demand to travellers coming from the European Union an international certification of vaccination against yellow fever. This fact is mainly due to the absence of recorded yellow fever cases in the area since 2003. However, many arguments pro and against its recommendation can be used according to prioritize individual risks of secondary vaccine effects or public health hazards due not to vaccinate. Altogether, the disease risk at the moment remains very low although its epidemic potentiality is not known. Among greater risk of vaccine side-effects populations, especially travellers of > 60 years, a careful and personal indication could be considered as the most reasonable attitude (AU)
