Cholera is a substantial health burden in many countries in Africa and Asia, where it is endemic. It is as well responsible for ongoing epidemics in sub-Saharan Africa which are becoming greater in terms of frequency, extension, and duration. Given the availability of two oral cholera vaccines and the new data on their efficacy, field effectiveness, feasibility, and acceptance in cholera-affected populations and in travelers, these vaccines should be used in endemic areas, in travelers for these areas and should be considered in areas at risk for outbreaks. The two vaccines currently available in worldwide are: (1) The killed oral vaccine (Dukoral, licensed by SBL–Sweden to Crucell–Holland) is recommended since 1999 by WHO and consists of a mixture of four preparations of heat or formalin killed whole cell Vibrio cholera O1 (Inaba and Ogaba serotypes, and classical and El Tor biotypes) that are then added with purified recombinant cholera toxin (CT) B subunit. Because CT cross-reacts with Escherichia coli LT the vaccine also provides short-term protection against ETEC (enterotoxigenic E. coli) which is of added benefit for travelers. It is available in more than 60 countries. (2) A bivalent O1 and O139 whole cell oral vaccine without CT B subunit (Shanchol) has been lately developed in Vietnam (licensed by VaBiotech–Viet Nam to Shantha Biotechnics–India. It is available in India and Indonesia. A structured search of papers in PubMed and reports on cholera vaccines by WHO and CDC, as well as critical reading and synthesis of the information was accomplished. Inclusion criteria were defined according to reports quality and relevance.

Objective: Traveler’s diarrhea (TD) is the most frequent disease among people from industrialized countries who travel to less developed ones, especially sub-Saharan Africa, Southern Asia and South America. The most common bacteria causing TD is enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC). The WC/rBS cholera vaccine (Dukoral®) has been shown to induce cross-protection against ETEC by means of the B subunit of the cholera toxin. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the WC/rBS cholera vaccine in preventing TD.Methods: Between May 1 and September 30 (2007), people seeking pre-travel advice in ten Spanish international vaccination centers were included in a prospective cohort study of travelers to cholera risk countries. The incidence rates of TD were adjusted for variables whose frequencies were statistically different (entry point 0.10) between the vaccinated and non-vaccinated cohorts.Findings: The vaccinated cohort (n = 544 travelers) included people vaccinated with the WC/rBS cholera vaccine, and the non-vaccinated cohort (n = 530 travelers) by people not vaccinated. The cumulative incidence rate of TD was 1.69 in vaccinated and 2.14 in non-vaccinated subjects. The adjusted relative risk of TD in vaccinated travelers was 0.72 (95% CI: 0.58–0.88) and the adjusted vaccination effectiveness was 28% (95% CI: 12–42).Conclusions: The WC/rBS cholera vaccine prevents TD in 2 out of 7 travelers (preventive fraction: 28%). The number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent 1 case of TD is 10.

BackgroundNowadays there is a debate about the indication of the oral whole-cell/recombinant B-subunit cholera vaccine (WC/rBS) in traveller's diarrhoea. However, a cost-benefit analysis based on real data has not been published.MethodsA cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit study of the oral cholera vaccine (WC/rBS), Dukoral® for the prevention of traveller's diarrhoea (TD) was performed in subjects travelling to cholera risk areas. The effectiveness of WC/rBS vaccine in the prevention of TD was analyzed in 362 travellers attending two International Vaccination Centres in Spain between May and September 2005.ResultsThe overall vaccine efficacy against TD was 42,6%. Direct healthcare-related costs as well as indirect costs (lost vacation days) subsequent to the disease were considered. Preventive vaccination against TD resulted in a mean saving of 79.26 € per traveller.ConclusionAccording to the cost-benefit analysis performed, the recommendation for WC/rBS vaccination in subjects travelling to zones at risk of TD is beneficial for the traveller, regardless of trip duration and visited continent.

Continued growth in international travel and forecasts for a great increase in the number of people who travel from industrialized to emerging and developing countries make it necessary to develop and improve the capacity to provide health protection to travelers. Measures available to prevent some diseases include a currently limited number of marketed vaccines which represent extremely useful tools to protect travelers. Travelers very often experience diarrheal and gastrointestinal diseases for which some vaccines are available. Use of these vaccines should be evaluated based on traveler and travel destination and characteristics. Vaccines available include those against cholera, typhoid fever, hepatitis A, hepatitis E (only available in China), and rotavirus. The aim of this review is to provide an updated summary about each of the abovementioned vaccines that may be useful for making decisions regarding their use and assessing their indications in recommendations for travelers.

The international maritime traffic of people and goods has often contributed to the spread of pathogens affecting public health. The Maritime Declaration of Health (MDH), according to the International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005), is a document containing data related to the state of health on board a ship during passage and on arrival at port. It is a useful tool for early detection of public health risks. The main objective of our study was to evaluate compliance with the model provided in the IHR, focusing on the format and degree of completion of MDH forms received at Spanish ports. We reviewed the content of 802 MDH forms submitted to nine Spanish ports between October 2014 and March 2015. Study results show that 22% of MDH forms presented did not comply with the recommended model and 39% were incomplete. The proportion of cargo ships with correct and complete MDH forms was lower than passenger ships; thus, the nine health questions were answered less frequently by cargo ships than passenger ships (63% vs 90%, p value < 0.001). The appropriate demand and usage of MDH forms by competent authorities should improve the quality of the document as a tool and improve risk assessment.