Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Nov 21;16(23). pii: E4638. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16234638.

Exit and Entry Screening Practices for Infectious Diseases among Travelers at Points of Entry: Looking for Evidence on Public Health Impact.

Author information

1
Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Thessaly, 41222 Larissa, Greece.
2
Robert Koch Institute, Department for Infectious Disease Epidemiology, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
3
Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (Chafea), L-2920 Luxemburg, Luxemburg.
4
European Commission, DG Health and Food Safety (SANTE), Unit C3-Crisis Management and Preparedness in Health, Luxemburg, L-2920, Luxembourg.
5
National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, RIVM, 3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands.

Abstract

A scoping search and a systematic literature review were conducted to give an insight on entry and exit screening referring to travelers at points of entry, by analyzing published evidence on practices, guidelines, and experiences in the past 15 years worldwide. Grey literature, PubMed. and Scopus were searched using specific terms. Most of the available data identified through the systematic literature review concerned entry screening measures at airports. Little evidence is available about entry and exit screening measure implementation and effectiveness at ports and ground crossings. Exit screening was part of the World Health Organisation's (WHO) temporary recommendations for implementation in certain points of entry, for specific time periods. Exit screening measures for Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) in the three most affected West African countries did not identify any cases and showed zero sensitivity and very low specificity. The percentages of confirmed cases identified out of the total numbers of travelers that passed through entry screening measures in various countries worldwide for Influenza Pandemic (H1N1) and EVD in West Africa were zero or extremely low. Entry screening measures for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) did not detect any confirmed SARS cases in Australia, Canada, and Singapore. Despite the ineffectiveness of entry and exit screening measures, authors reported several important concomitant positive effects that their impact is difficult to assess, including discouraging travel of ill persons, raising awareness, and educating the traveling public and maintaining operation of flights from/to the affected areas. Exit screening measures in affected areas are important and should be applied jointly with other measures including information strategies, epidemiological investigation, contact tracing, vaccination, and quarantine to achieve a comprehensive outbreak management response. Based on review results, an algorithm about decision-making for entry/exit screening was developed.

KEYWORDS:

IHR; PHEIC; airport; border; ground crossing; health measure; points of entry; port; screening

PMID:
31766548
DOI:
10.3390/ijerph16234638
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)
Loading ...
Support Center