Malaria standby emergency treatment (SBET) for travellers visiting malaria endemic areas: a systematic review and meta-analysis.


Journal

Journal of travel medicine
ISSN: 1708-8305
Titre abrégé: J Travel Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9434456

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 Jun 2019
Historique:
received: 13 03 2019
revised: 11 04 2019
accepted: 11 04 2019
pubmed: 18 4 2019
medline: 5 6 2020
entrez: 18 4 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Malaria prevention methods for travellers to low or moderate malaria risk areas vary and remain controversial. Standby emergency treatment (SBET) for malaria is one possible strategy increasingly recommended since 1988 with little evidence on its effectiveness or how it is truly being used. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed based on a structured search in Embase, Medline, PubMed, Cochrane and Web of Science on 7 September 2018. The primary outcome was the overall prevalence of SBET use in travellers, and secondary outcomes were the proportion carrying SBET, the response to fever [use of SBET, health facility attendance and use of malaria rapid diagnostic test (mRDT)], adverse events to SBET and the proportion using SBET incorrectly (incorrect dosage/duration). The pooled SBET use prevalence was analysed using a random effects model. A descriptive summary was done to present secondary outcomes. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO CRD42018103703. A total of 11 studies were eligible for inclusion among the 1027 titles identified by our search. The studies included 7/11 prospective cohort studies that recruited pre-travel clinic attendees in Europe and 4/11 cross-sectional studies, of which 3 recruited travellers at airports before their return home from Southeast Asia and Africa and 1 from an employee registry including long-term travellers. The overall pooled prevalence of SBET use among the 26 403 travellers was 2.5% (95% confidence interval, 1.1-4.3%; range, 0.4-10.8%). There was significant variation in the proportion of travellers carrying SBET medication (40-100%), the proportion of travellers with appropriate response to fever (23-100%), adverse events (0-33%) and incorrect dosage/duration of SBET (0-100%). Adherence to the proposed recommendations for SBET use, notably the response to fever, was poor. If the use of SBET is to be pursued, modifications to the current SBET strategy should be considered, such as better selection of travellers at higher risk for malaria and the potential addition of mRDTs.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Malaria prevention methods for travellers to low or moderate malaria risk areas vary and remain controversial. Standby emergency treatment (SBET) for malaria is one possible strategy increasingly recommended since 1988 with little evidence on its effectiveness or how it is truly being used.
METHODS METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed based on a structured search in Embase, Medline, PubMed, Cochrane and Web of Science on 7 September 2018. The primary outcome was the overall prevalence of SBET use in travellers, and secondary outcomes were the proportion carrying SBET, the response to fever [use of SBET, health facility attendance and use of malaria rapid diagnostic test (mRDT)], adverse events to SBET and the proportion using SBET incorrectly (incorrect dosage/duration). The pooled SBET use prevalence was analysed using a random effects model. A descriptive summary was done to present secondary outcomes. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO CRD42018103703.
RESULTS RESULTS
A total of 11 studies were eligible for inclusion among the 1027 titles identified by our search. The studies included 7/11 prospective cohort studies that recruited pre-travel clinic attendees in Europe and 4/11 cross-sectional studies, of which 3 recruited travellers at airports before their return home from Southeast Asia and Africa and 1 from an employee registry including long-term travellers. The overall pooled prevalence of SBET use among the 26 403 travellers was 2.5% (95% confidence interval, 1.1-4.3%; range, 0.4-10.8%). There was significant variation in the proportion of travellers carrying SBET medication (40-100%), the proportion of travellers with appropriate response to fever (23-100%), adverse events (0-33%) and incorrect dosage/duration of SBET (0-100%).
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Adherence to the proposed recommendations for SBET use, notably the response to fever, was poor. If the use of SBET is to be pursued, modifications to the current SBET strategy should be considered, such as better selection of travellers at higher risk for malaria and the potential addition of mRDTs.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30995308
pii: 5475009
doi: 10.1093/jtm/taz027
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Antimalarials 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Meta-Analysis Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© International Society of Travel Medicine 2019. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Auteurs

Rainer Tan (R)

Travel Clinic, Department of Research, Innovation and Training, Unisanté, Center for Primary Care and Public Health, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Jolanda Elmers (J)

Medical Library, Research and Education Department, Lausanne University Hospital, Rue du Bugnon 46, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Blaise Genton (B)

Travel Clinic, Department of Research, Innovation and Training, Unisanté, Center for Primary Care and Public Health, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH