EUR were more likely to visit other destinations during their trip that might have required the use of malaria prophylaxis and yellow fever vaccine, but evaluating this is not possible. In conclusion, important differences between Belnacasan concentration pre-travel preparation and travel-related illnesses were noted between the

group of NAM and EUR travelers studied. Although no definitive conclusions can be drawn about these differences, our data highlight the need for further research on the factors associated with differences in pre-travel preparation and their consequences among travelers from different countries visiting a specific destination. The need to improve access to quality pre-travel health services and to provide consistent destination-specific advice is suggested among international travel medicine providers. Studies by the authors regarding prophylactic medications and high-altitude illness among travelers to Cusco are currently underway to improve our understanding AZD2014 chemical structure of this problem. The authors would like to thank the kind assistance in the development of this survey provided by the personnel at Velasco Astete International Airport in Cusco city. We would also like to thank Dr A. Clinton White Jr for critically reviewing the article. The

authors state they have no conflicts of interest to declare. “
“This Editorial refers to the article by Rossi and Genton, pp. 284–288 of this issue. At the core of any productive pre-travel encounter is the process of assessing travel-related risks, effectively communicating uncertainties, and then addressing these issues through an individualized risk management plan. In spite of its importance, there has been little formal study on the subject of risk Florfenicol (ie, risk research) in the context of travel medicine. There have been a few articles that attempt to describe the process of risk assessment for any individual traveler,[1]

and less on factors affecting a provider’s effectiveness in risk communication with travelers.[2, 3] Instead, there is a tendency in travel medicine literature to provide general lists of recommendations on travel-related topics that have been compiled from easily accessible data (eg, travelers’ diarrhea or malaria), or from a sponsored agency (eg, vaccines). There is little research on improving the effectiveness of travel medicine practice at the individual traveler level. For instance, the plethora of studies on malaria chemoprophylaxis describing poor adherence among individuals contrasts with the few practical solutions that are provided.[4] Similarly, we have a dearth of research articles addressing common problems with potentially lethal outcomes, such as acute altitude illnesses encountered among clients going to hypoxic travel environments.[5] Yet, it is easy to summon articles on vaccine preventable diseases that are rarely seen in international travel (eg, Japanese encephalitis).