Why Has the Rate of Death Due to Infectious Disease Started to Increase Again

• Review
• Open Admission
• Published: 31 January 2021

COVID-19 in comparison with other emerging viral diseases: risk of geographic spread via travel

Tropical Diseases, Travel Medicine and Vaccines volume 7, Commodity number:three (2021) Cite this article

• 38k Accesses

• 12 Citations

• 68 Altmetric

• Metrics details

Abstract

Purpose of review

The COVID-xix pandemic poses a major global health threat. The rapid spread was facilitated past air travel although rigorous travel bans and lockdowns were able to tedious downward the spread. How does COVID-nineteen compare with other emerging viral diseases of the past two decades?

Recent findings

Viral outbreaks differ in many means, such equally the individuals well-nigh at hazard e.one thousand. pregnant women for Zika and the elderly for COVID-19, their vectors of transmission, their fatality rate, and their transmissibility often measured as basic reproduction number. The hazard of geographic spread via air travel differs significantly between emerging infectious diseases.

Summary

COVID-19 is not associated with the highest case fatality rate compared with other emerging viral diseases such as SARS and Ebola, but the combination of a high reproduction number, superspreading events and a globally immunologically naïve population has led to the highest global number of deaths in the past 20 decade compared to any other pandemic.

Primal points

1. one.

   Public health emergencies of international concern in the past 20 years include COVID-19, poliomyelitis, H1N1, Ebola and Zika

2. 2.

   COVID-xix is the worst pandemic in scale and speed of this century associated with the highest number of global deaths

3. 3.

   Spread via air travel is most hitting for respiratory pathogens rather than vector-borne or other emerging viruses

4. 4.

   Combating COVID-xix will require an all-social club and all-government approach

Introduction

Emerging infectious disease outbreaks are most likely to originate in wild fauna, and are increasing significantly over time correlated with socio-economic, ecology, ecological factors combined with increasing mobility and globalization [one, 2] including climate change [3, 4]. Viral outbreaks differ in many ways, such as the individuals most at risk e.g. pregnant women for Zika and the elderly for COVID-xix, their vectors of manual, their fatality rate, and their transmissibility frequently measured as basic reproduction number. Despite these differences, policy responses used to tackle viral epidemics have tended to be similar beyond time and countries – social distancing, quarantines, school closures [5], and information campaigns are the policy instruments normally available, in addition to vector control campaigns for vector-borne viral diseases, personal protection, and nigh importantly, vaccines. For diseases with high potential of geographic spread associated with high example fatalities, rigorous mobility and travel restrictions are being deployed [6]. This review examines emerging or re-emerging viral infections of the past two decades, their characteristics and the risk of geographic spread via air travel.

Coronaviruses

The current pandemic is caused by a coronavirus of zoonotic origin -SARS-CoV-2-, that emerged in Wuhan, China, by the cease of 2019, and was speedily declared a public health emergency of international business concern (PHEIC). SARS-CoV-2 is nearly likely of bat origin, similar to its predecessor SARS virus that caused the SARS outbreak in 2003 [7]. Live animate being markets selling multiple species of wild and domestic animals in proximity to large populations of densely housed humans are idea to be the source of both outbreaks [8]. The main transmission route is via respiratory droplets, and the angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), establish in the lower respiratory tract of humans, has been identified equally the receptor used for cell entry for both SARS and SARS-CoV-ii [9, x]. The basic reproductive number R0 is 2–iii, indicating that every case leads to ii–3 secondary cases), is similar or somewhat higher to that of SARS [xi]. R0 higher up 1 will lead to propagation and further growth of the outbreak.

Risk factors for astringent disease outcomes include older age and co-morbidities. The higher asymptomatic rate, further compounded past pre-symptomatic transmission has made containment much harder for COVID-xix than for SARS [8]. COVID-nineteen spread is facilitated by population densities, urbanization, mass gatherings and superspreading events [12,13,14,fifteen]..

The SARS epidemic in 2003 reported 8098 cases with 774 deaths, and was eventually brought under control by July 2003, in a matter of eight months [viii]. By interrupting all man-to-homo manual through aggressive case detection, prompt isolation, contact tracing with legal enforcement of quarantine, SARS was effectively eradicated [8]. In dissimilarity, by December 2020, SARS-CoV-ii has caused more than lxx meg infections with more than than one.7 one thousand thousand deaths, in a matter of 12 months with no sign of abating. Although lockdowns and unprecedented travel restrictions were able to flatten the curve, pre-mature re-opening led to resurgence in most countries [sixteen].

The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) has plagued the Heart E since it was first reported in 2012. MERS spread to 27 countries across the globe, with more than than 2274 cases with 842 case fatalities to appointment [17]. Similar to COVID-19, household manual, transmission to wellness intendance workers and clustering are mutual [18]. Cantankerous-species transmission is the likely origin of this virus. Camels may human action every bit a direct source of homo MERS-CoV infection [19]. The case fatality rate of MERS (37%) is far higher than that of COVID-nineteen, yet, outbreaks were independent relatively expediently as they were normally limited to hospital-based outbreaks.

Geographic spread of coronaviruses via air travel

Prior to the lockdown in Wuhan, China, COVID-19 rapidly spread inside Communist china, and also globally post-obit the management of connectivity and high air passenger volumes [20, 21]. The epicenter from Wuhan quickly moved to Iran, then Italy, and then all of Europe, followed past increasingly bigger outbreaks in the U.s.a., Brazil and other countries in the Americas. Mass gathering events and spread via returning travelers or pilgrims triggered new outbreaks in various countries [22,23,24]. The vast majority of countries in the world now report COVID-xix cases, although some countries have been more successful than others in implementing public wellness measures to curb the epidemic, such equally China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Thailand, New Zealand and Singapore [25]. Travel bans have led to a delay of importation into Commonwealth of australia [26]. Entry and get out screening, quarantine for 14 days, and increasingly testing is being used to identify imported cases and prevent onward transmission [27].

Although SARS spread to 26 countries, the vast bulk of cases were concentrated in five countries or regions: China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore and Toronto, Canada. Cluster effect and superspreading events were well described, but community transmission only occurred to a larger extent in China—all other countries had minimal community manual, and the majority of transmission occurred within hospitals. Through rigorous public health measures such as prompt institutional isolation of all cases, contact tracing and quarantine (with legal monitoring) for 14 days of all contacts, and personal protective measures in hospitals, SARS was finer eradicated. Although travel warnings were issued, no lockdowns were implemented except in China. Virtually of the outbreaks were nosocomial.

With regards to MERS, Kingdom of saudi arabia (KSA) so far has carried the greatest burden of MERS-CoV since its emergence, with 85% of the full global reported cases existence either diagnosed or originating in KSA, with a total of 1897 cases and 734 fatalities. The second major outbreak was due to exportation of MERS from Saudi arabia via a business traveler to Republic of korea resulting in an explosive but in the end independent outbreak in 2022 [28]. Lessons learned from the MERS outbreak were the foundation of Korea's enhanced pandemic preparedness plans which enabled the land to successfully curb the COVID-19 outbreak in Korea in early 2020.

Ebola

Ebola was declared a public health emergency in 2022 in Westward Africa, and once again in 2022 in the Democratic Republic of Congo [6, 29]. In the pantheon of emerging infectious diseases, Ebola virus stands out as one of the deadliest. The Zaire species of Ebola kills somewhere between 40 to 90% of its victims, and usually up of 60% of infected people dice [thirty]. Only a handful of infectious diseases tin merits such high death rates, including rabies [31, 32], pneumonic plague, and inhalational anthrax [33]. About 14,000 deaths due to Ebola were recorded in 2014. Why did the Ebola outbreak issue in a much lower death toll compared to COVID-xix? Ane major departure between Ebola and COVID-19 is the way and timing of transmission. Ebola is spread during the last stage of the disease through bodily fluids. Exposure of infected individuals to a high-density population could event in a catastrophic outbreak, yet, overall the R0 is far lower than that of COVID-19 as transmission depends on closer proximity between humans, in particular contact to bodily fluids. Those persons who are at greatest risk for Ebola infection are those who have very close contact taking intendance of the sick, bedridden victims, regardless whether they are in the home or the hospital. Rapid patient identification, isolation and aggressive follow upwards is shown to chop-chop limit the potential for disease spread. Isolation of Ebola cases is successful considering of the absence of pre-symptomatic shedding, eg the virus only or mainly spreads when the victim has symptoms. Transmission tin also occur because of reservoirs of the virus in survivors in their optics or semen.

The earth's second largest Ebola outbreak occurred in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in 2022 and led to a second proclamation of a public health emergency in 2019. The public health emergency was declared over on 25 June 2020. The nearly ii year-long outbreak was particularly challenging considering it took place in an active conflict zone. Led by the Government and the Ministry of Health of DRC and supported by WHO and partners, the response involved preparation thousands of health workers, registering 250,000 contacts, testing 220,000 samples, providing patients with equitable access to avant-garde therapeutics, vaccinating over 303,000 people with the highly effective Ebola vaccine (rVSV-ZEBOV-GP vaccine) [34, 35], and offering care for all survivors after their recovery. The response was bolstered by the engagement and leadership of the afflicted communities [36]. By July 2020, a total of 3481 cases (3323 confirmed, 158 probable) with 2299 deaths had been reported [36].

Geographic spread of Ebola via air travel

Spread of Ebola occurred mainly via country edge crossings between West African countries in 2014. Spread via air travel has only rarely occurred, the main reason being that Ebola patients are so sick that they cannot board a aeroplane or are picked upward at entry screening. However, since Ebola has an incubation menses of up to 21 days, carriers could arrive in a country weeks before symptoms develop – potentially transmitting it to the people they know. Xi Ebola cases were reported in the US in 2014, of which 7 cases were medically evacuated from other countries. Nine of the people contracted the disease outside the US and traveled into the land, either as regular airline passengers or as medical evacuees; of those ix, two died. Two people contracted Ebola in the U.s.a.. Both were nurses who treated an Ebola patient; both recovered. In 2022 some US state governors signed an order authorizing the mandatory quarantine for 21 days of anyone, fifty-fifty if asymptomatic, who had straight contact with Ebola patients, over and beyond the CDC'south voluntary quarantine.

Based on epidemic weather condition and international flight restrictions to and from Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone equally of Sept 2014, models projected 2.8 travellers infected with Ebola virus departing the above 3 countries via commercial flights, on average, every month. 91,547 (64%) of all air travellers departing Republic of guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone had expected destinations in low-income and lower-middle-income countries [37]. Screening international travellers departing three airports would enable health assessments of all travellers at highest chance of exposure to Ebola virus infection. For the Kivu outbreak in DRC in 2018, studies showed fiddling commercial airline connectivity from the Ebola-afflicted area; however, larger cities in DRC and throughout Due east Africa should be aware of the potential for Ebola virus importation through this road [38]. Due to express air travel from the DRC, the outbreak did non spread globally [38].

H1N1 flu

Influenza set on rates vary by season, by geographic location, by setting (eg closed settings versus community settings), by predominant subtype and past age group. Influenza outbreaks accept been described in hospitals, aboard cruise ships [39] and on airplanes [40]. H1N1 preceded the PHEIC declaration of Zika, and was the cause of the 2009 pandemic. The 2009 H1N1 pandemic strain possessed a unique combination of gene segments including genes that originated from swine, avian and human influenza viruses that had been circulating among pigs in North America and Europe [41]. The age and mortality risks for the H1N1 flu pandemic were different to the current COVID-19 pandemic, with younger persons affected but an overall much lower instance fatality rate than COVID-19. The epidemic was focused in children, with an constructive reproduction number of approximately 1.2–ane.3 [xxx] compared to 2.5 to 3.ii for SARS-CoV-two [xi]. During 2009, the first year after the emergence of the virus, an estimated 62 million illnesses, 274,000 hospitalizations, and 12,400 deaths associated with the 2009 H1N1 virus occurred in the Us [30]. The highest set on rates were in children younger than 5 years of age, and 90% of estimated deaths occurred in persons younger than 65 years of age. In 1 estimate, the mean age among persons whose deaths were attributed to H1N1 was 37 years, compared to a mean age of 76 years amongst deaths attributed to seasonal influenza. While vaccine was delivered relatively tardily, it was demonstrated to be effective. Backlog deaths attributed to influenza varied from 3300 deaths to 48,000 deaths [xxx]. FluNet is the main tool for data sharing amidst the WHO Global Flu Surveillance Network, every bit well as the public. It allows 112 WHO National Influenza Centers in 83 countries access to remote data entry [42].

Geographic spread of influenza, in particular H1N1, via air travel

The role of air travel in the global spread of influenza has been the subject of a significant torso of research. H1N1 spread rapidly co-ordinate to air travel patterns first from Mexico to the United States and so effectually the world during the initial wavefront of this epidemic [43]. The speed and direction of spread is directly correlated with air passengers volumes and destinations of the majority of flights. Given the brusk incubation time, isolation and quarantine is much less effective compared to diseases with a longer incubation time such every bit SARS and COVID-19. Regarding air travel, the chief route connected to the influenza source area should be targeted for travel restrictions. Imposing a 99% air travel restriction delays the epidemic tiptop past up to ii weeks [44]. Simulation modelling for the 1998–1999 through 2000–2001 influenza seasons using a standard compartmental model coupled with air transportation data showed that air travel plays an of import function in the spread of annual influenza within the U.South., particularly in cities with large air travel volumes [45]. Combination strategies can delay spread, reduce overall number of cases, and delay and reduce meridian set on charge per unit more individual strategies [46]. All the same, antivirals and hospitalization were institute to exist more effective on assault charge per unit reductions than travel restrictions. Combined strategies (with 99% restriction on all send modes) deferred the elevation for long enough to establish a vaccination program [44].

A stochastic detached event simulation model assessed the effectiveness of rider screening at US airports [47]. Modelling of US airport screening would place fifty% infected individuals; efficacy is limited because of asymptomatically infected passengers. Screening would non significantly delay inflow of pandemic influenza via international air transport but could reduce the rate of new U.s.a. cases and subsequent deaths. Implementation of entry screening policies was associated with on average additional 7–12 24-hour interval delays in local manual compared to nations that did non implement entry screening, with lower bounds of 95% confidence intervals consequent with no additional delays and upper premises extending to xx–30 day additional delays [48]. The resources required for implementation should be balanced against the expected benefits of entry screening. A study in Mainland china during May–November 2009 analysing the effectiveness of edge entry screening and holiday-related school closures, age distribution and transmission dynamic characteristics were similar to those in Northern Hemisphere temperate countries. The viii days of national holidays in October reduced the effective reproduction number by 37% (95% credible interval 28–45%) [49]. Restrictions on air travel are projected to be of "surprisingly footling value in delaying epidemics, unless almost all travel ceases very shortly after epidemics are detected." Interventions to reduce local transmission of flu are probable to be more constructive at reducing the charge per unit of global spread [50].

Measles

Measles is one of the most transmissible viral infections that although mild in most cases, can cause serious illness, life-long complications and death [51]. Measles is transmitted from human to human being via respiratory droplets, and is associated with the earth's highest reproduction number of more than 10 [30], far higher than that of SARS-CoV-2. Strebel in "Plotkin's Vaccines" reports that the instance fatality ratio is loftier in children aged < one twelvemonth, lower in children aged i–9 years, and so rises again in teenagers and adults [30]. In industrialized countries, decease occurs in one–3 out of 1000 cases. Measles runs a more than devastating class in children in developing countries or in settings with minimal care where measles bloodshed rates tin can be every bit high as ii to fifteen% [xxx]. Earlier vaccine introduction, measles affected over xc% of children globally by the age of fifteen [52]. Effectiveness of the measles vaccine after ii doses is as high as 97% [53]^. Given such an efficacious vaccine, in 2012, the World Health Assembly fix the objective of eliminating measles in four of the six World Wellness Organisation (WHO) regions by 2022 and in five regions past 2022 [54]. Countries in all 6 WHO regions take adopted goals for measles elimination by 2020. Indeed, during 2000–2017 annual reported measles incidence decreased 83% because of vaccination campaigns and childhood vaccination programmes, from 145 to 25 cases per one thousand thousand population; and annual estimated measles deaths decreased eighty%, from 545,174 to 109,638 [52].

The declaration of measles elimination from the Americas in 1999 was a historic milestone, as the offset WHO region to eliminate measles [55]. However, in 2018, the Americas saw a major resurgence, mainly because of the migration crisis in Venezuela [56, 57], combined with decreasing vaccine coverage that increased the vulnerability to importation of measles [58]. The extent of the current outbreak is a setback to the WHO's global measles elimination goals. In 1998, the European Region WHO set a target to eliminate measles and rubella by 2010 [59], which was not achieved. In 2018, Europe saw a major resurgence of measles; the total number of measles cases in 2022 was the highest in this decade, reaching iii times the total cases in 2022 [60]. In 2018, Europe reported more than 21,000 cases of measles, including 35 deaths [61]. Early reports in 2022 show a further 300% increment [62]. Of note, social distancing and lockdown measures during 2022 resulted in a major pass up of measles [63].

Every bit there is no animal reservoir for measles, measles resurgence is due to human move of viraemic persons [61]. Some attribute the enormous migration into Europe in the past 5 years fas the reason for the measles resurgence in this region [64,65,66]. Indeed, infectious diseases in migrants including measles are well documented [55, 67,68,69,seventy,71]. Travelers and pilgrims besides play a role in disease propagation, including adoption from measles-owned countries [72,73,74]: However, the main reason for the resurgence of measles globally is vaccine hesitancy leading to suboptimal vaccine coverage rates [75]. In the year 2020, measles vaccine coverage rates dropped farther due to the COVID-19 pandemic as lock-downs interrupted routine immunization programmes and a farther resurgence of measles is expected in the years to come [76]. The colliding epidemics of COVID-19, measles and Ebola in DRC are of particular concern [77].

Geographic spread of measles via travel

Measles is oftentimes not considered a risk for travellers, and hence pre-travel advice often does non include measles vaccination [71, 78]. In a written report among returned Australian travellers, only 1 of 25 imported cases reported seeking pre-travel health advice and few had perceived measles equally a travel-associated disease [79]. Measles was as well highlighted equally a high gamble for amplification during the Hajj pilgrimage [74, 80]. While there are reports of measles importations resulting from international adoptions and humanitarian entrants, the bulk of international travel and subsequently, the majority of importations of measles are in short-term travellers [81]. Large, sustained outbreaks in countries with sub-optimal immunisation coverage, such as many countries in Europe, result in regular incursions by travellers into regions that take eliminated measles, some resulting in local outbreaks.

Migrants are oft unfairly blamed for the spread of measles. Yet, the estimated seroprevalence of measles IgG antibodies of 80–88% among contempo migrants from the WHO African region [66], while sub-optimal, these rates are greater than WHO coverage estimates from the region and on par with coverage reported in some European receiving countries. Despite tape numbers of migrants arriving in Europe, the contribution of migration on the current epidemiology of measles in Europe is minimal [55]. However, immigrants from within and outside Europe are a growing population group and confront barriers to accessing immunisation and other wellness services and strategies to accomplish migrant populations and provide grab-upwards immunisation are needed [55].

Poliomyelitis

Since the Global Polio Eradication Initiative was established in 1988, two of the 3 wild poliovirus (WPV) serotypes (types 2 and 3) have been eradicated. Manual of WPV type ane (WPV1) remains uninterrupted just in Afghanistan and Islamic republic of pakistan. Although the case fatality charge per unit is very low, the resulting life-long disabilities. Poliomyelitis was the leading crusade of permanent inability in children in the pre-vaccine era. In 1988, when the global eradication target was adopted, approximately 350,000 cases of paralytic poliomyelitis were occurring annually. In 2019, Transitional islamic state of afghanistan and Pakistan reported the highest number of WPV1 cases (176) since 2014. During January ane–March 31, 2022 (equally of June 19), 54 WPV1 cases were reported, an gauge fourfold increase from 12 cases during the corresponding period in 2022 [82]. Paralytic poliomyelitis tin can also be caused by circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus (cVDPV), which emerges when attenuated oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) virus reverts to neurovirulence following prolonged circulation in nether-immunized populations. Since the global withdrawal of type 2-containing OPV (OPV2) in April 2016, cVDPV type 2 (cVDPV2) outbreaks have increased in number and geographic extent. During Jan 2018–March 2020, 21 countries reported 547 cVDPV2 cases [82]. The COVID-xix) pandemic and lockdowns accept resulted in pause of immunization activities and disruptions to poliovirus surveillance in 2020.

Geographic spread of polio via travel

Poliomyelitis is a rare disease on a global scale, and hence spread via travel is rare. That said, the endgame of polio eradication is hampered past the international spread of poliovirus via travelers [83]. In response to ongoing importations of poliovirus into polio-gratis countries, on five May 2014, WHO declared the international spread of wild poliovirus a public wellness emergency of international business organisation. Unbeknown to many, polio is withal a public health emergency of international concern.

In a modelling study on the take a chance of exportation of poliomyelitis, immunization coverage rates, infectious period, the asymptomatic-to-symptomatic ratio, and besides the probability of a traveler being infectious at the fourth dimension of travel were considered [83]. The model estimated 665 polio exportations (> 99% of which were asymptomatic) from nine polio-infected countries in 2014, of which 78.3% originated from Pakistan [83]. This model also estimated 21 importations of poliovirus into Saudi Arabia via Hajj pilgrims and 20 poliovirus infections imported to India in the same year. For countries that are vulnerable to polio outbreaks due to poor national polio immunization coverage rates, this model may help guide policy makers to decide whether imposing an entry requirement in terms of proof of vaccination against polio would be justified, as India did for Islamic republic of pakistan when Republic of india was alleged polio-complimentary.

Monkeypox and smallpox

The identification of monkeypox imported in ii dissever travelers to the Britain with one onward transmission to a health intendance worker in 2022 raised media and political attention on an emerging public health threat [84]. In the same yr, Nigeria experienced an unusual outbreak of monkeypox, after the case was confirmed in 1978. As of 13th Oct 2018, there have been one hundred and sixteen confirmed cases the majority of whom are under the historic period of 40 years [84]. First identified in the Autonomous Commonwealth of Congo (DRC) in 1970, monkeypox has since 2010 expanded to cause outbreaks amongst humans in at least seven additional African countries: Cameroon, Fundamental African Republic, Republic of the Congo, Liberia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone and South Sudan [85] Major noesis gaps remain on the epidemiology, host reservoir, and emergence, transmission, pathogenesis and prevention of monkeypox. Vaccine evolution against monkeypox is ongoing [86]. While monkeypox is currently non a global threat, many lessons can be learned from its "cousin" virus smallpox on the demand for international cooperation and a well-funded global vaccination programme was needed to eradicate a disease [87]. It is estimated that over seventy% of the world'south population is no longer protected confronting smallpox, and through cross-immunity, and therefore also not to monkeypox.

Geographic spread of monkeypox via travel

The importations to the UK and an importation to Israel stand for the first-time international travellers have been implicated in the spread of monkeypox outside of an outbreak setting [50]. In 2003, Usa several human being monkeypox cases traced to virus exposure via infected captive prairie dogs were reported [88]. The virus was likely introduced through a shipment of imported African rodents, which were kept with other mammals, including prairie dogs, in a pet distribution facility in the Midwest. To forbid further monkeypox virus introduction, importation of African rodents was restricted and restrictions were introduced on domestic trade or movement of prairie dogs and certain other rodents.

Emerging arboviruses

Arthropod-borne viruses (arboviruses) take a long history of emerging to infect humans, but during contempo decades, they take been spreading more than effectively with widening of the geographic distribution, and increasing magnitude and frequency of outbreaks [89]. This is due to several factors, including increased air travel, climate change [90] and population growth including urbanization [91]. Urbanization is especially of import for the re-emergence of dengue, whereby humans living in shut proximity become the amplification hosts and peri-domestic mosquitoes, mainly Aedes aegypti, mediate man-to-man transmission. Dengue, yellow fever, chikungunya, and Zika viruses take undergone such urban emergence. Emergence tin can involve elementary spill-over from enzootic (wild fauna) cycles, as in the case of West Nile virus accompanying geographic expansion into the Americas, and recently also increasingly in Europe [92]; secondary amplification in domesticated animals, as seen with Japanese encephalitis [93], Venezuelan equine encephalitis, and Rift Valley fever viruses [94].

The Zika outbreak in the Americas was declared a PHEIC in January 2016. The Zika epidemic presents the first always known association between a flavivirus, carried past the Aedes aegypti mosquito, and congenital illness. The built disease about closely linked to the Zika virus in the 2022 epidemic was microcephaly where the occipitofrontal caput circumference is smaller than 98% of all newborns, but many more than neurodevelopmental anomalies were observed [95, 96]. Mortality in adults is extremely low. Zika was also unusual every bit for the first time in history sexual manual of a flavivirus was confirmed. Sexual transmission also increased the fear of importation and subsequent frontward transmission even where the vector does non exist, and prompted WHO and CDC to publish advice on how to reduce the risk of sexual manual in travelers [97]. Although Zika is all-time documented for its associated with maternal infections and their impact on birth defects, also dengue and chikungunya can lead to maternal complications as well as astringent infections in the neonate [98].

Dengue is the near prevalent arboviral disease, nowadays in more 120 countries affecting more than ii billion people [99]. The most mutual life-threatening clinical response to dengue infection is the dengue vascular permeability syndrome, epidemiologically linked to secondary infection, but tin can too occur in primary infection. Antibody-dependent enhancement, viral factors, age, host factors, and clinical experience of the managing dr. modulate the risk of progressing to astringent dengue. The reported relative risk of severe dengue in secondary versus tertiary infection ranges from 2 to vii [100]. The accented risk of severe dengue in highly endemic areas in children is well-nigh 0.1% per yr for principal infections, and 0.iv% for secondary infections. About two–4% of secondary infections lead to severe dengue. Clinical management of severe dengue depends on judicious use of fluid rehydration. The take a chance of travel-acquired dengue depends on destination, flavour and duration of travel and activities during travel. Seroconversion rates reported in travellers therefore vary betwixt less than one% to more than 20% [100]. Chikungunya is associated with a low mortality, but high morbidity with disabling arthritis that tin last for months beyond the viremic phase [101]. On the other hand, yellowish fever has the highest case fatality charge per unit and is therefore one of the most feared arboviral diseases [102].

Geographic spread of arboviral diseases via travel

The spread of arboviral diseases via travelers to non-owned countries is well documented, and has led to the geographic expansion including new establishment in countries where the vector exists. The rapid geographic spread of dengue viruses globally is the result of increasing mobility of people via mod ways of transportation [103,104,105,106]. Air travel connectivity between dengue-owned countries and from dengue-owned countries to non-endemic, but still vulnerable settings has increased exponentially [107]. Whilst imported dengue cases to the U.s.a. have resulted in pocket-size dengue clusters for many years [108]; the outset autochthonous sporadic cases in Europe (France and Croatia) were reported only in 2010 [109, 110]. In 2012, the first major European outbreak of dengue occurred in Madeira [111]. Viremic travelers to non-owned areas where Aedes mosquitoes be constitute the source for triggering autochthonous transmission [112]. About 58% of travelers who returned to Europe subsequently acquiring a dengue infection during their travel to dengue-owned countries were viremic when seeking medical care, thus highlighting the potential for dengue virus introduction [113]. Fortunately, the seasonal window in Europe when vectorial capacity is sufficient to sustain autochthonous transmission is short [114].

A statistically significant positive clan between rider flows via airline travel from countries experiencing chikungunya epidemics and the number of imported cases in the USA at the state level [115]. This validation report demonstrated that air travel was strongly associated with observed importation of chikungunya cases in the Us and can exist a useful proxy for identifying areas at increased risk for illness importation. For the get-go time in history, in 2016, yellow fever was exported from Africa to Asia [116].

Spread of arboviral diseases via air travel is mainly driven by viremic travelers, but spread can besides occur through infected mosquitoes. Insecticide treatments in aircraft (termed 'shipping disinsection') aim to back up the containment of potentially affliction-carrying vector insects. Despite established efficacy of aircraft disinsection in trials, its effectiveness and feasibility in flight operations, and its usefulness equally a public health measure need to be enhanced [117].

Stakeholders of pandemics

Numerous travel stakeholders are afflicted past, and affect, pandemics. Although the key purpose of the International Health Regulations (IHR) is to prevent unwarranted interruptions to trade and travel during big transnational communicable diseases outbreaks [29], stakeholders react in different ways depending on political force per unit area, public sentiment and the media. For case, WHO did non consequence any travel restrictions for the Ebola outbreak, yet air travel plummeted. The reasons for intermission of travel during the 2014–xvi Ebola outbreak were complex, with decisions by States but partly contributing to the abeyance. Decisions past non-state actors, specially the travel industry itself, were major drivers [vi].

Run a risk of in-flight transmission

More than 1 billion passengers travel by air annually [107]. Although this manuscript focuses on the gamble of spread via air travel, it is important to also apace mention transmission that may happen on flights. In-flight transmission tin occur especially for respiratory pathogens: Airborne transmission may occur through large droplets > five μm that fall to the floor within a radius of 1 m and might exist amend called contact transmission, or through aerosolization of an infectious agent in aerosol < 5 μm that remain airborne for a long time and tin disperse widely [40]. Cabin air is normally exchanged fifteen to 20 times per hour, as compared with 12 times per hour in most role buildings. Shipping recirculates 50% of the air to control humidity and fuel efficiency. Recirculated air passes through high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters capable of removing 99.97% of particles 0.3 μm in diameter, hence information technology is not the air quality but the proximity of persons that present the greatest risk of in-flying transmission. Precise data on airborne transmission of infections in aircraft are deficient and imprecise, but they propose that run a risk is associated with sitting within 2 rows of a contagious rider for a flight time of more than than viii h [forty]. This clan is mainly derived from studies of in-flight transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in which tuberculin skin test conversion was taken to indicate infection acquired during flight. In one study, 4 of 15 passengers within 2 rows had a tuberculin skin test conversion [40]. During the SARS outbreak in 2003, 40 flights were identified with a case of SARS on board; in-flying manual is thought to have taken place on 5 of these flights, infecting a total of 37 passengers [forty]. As for COVID-19, in-flying transmission has been reported for more than 40 flights, simply the number could exist much college every bit ascertainment to in-flying manual is difficult and imprecise [118]. Wearing of confront masks volition reduce the take a chance. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the airline industry has taken a pro-active arroyo to increase passenger condom through extended ventilation at the gate, boarding and deplaning strategies, improved shipping disinfection, and pre-flight screening such as temperature checks and COVID-19 testing [119]. Of the other respiratory infections, the common common cold is as well common for in-flight transmission to exist studied, and measles and meningococcal infection are known to be transmitted occasionally.

Food- and water-borne manual usually involves a unmarried source that transmits microbes to many people. The most commonly reported diseases transmitted on aircraft have been due to contaminated food. Vector-borne manual is actually via insects, though theoretically might be via vermin (as with plague rats on ships), and aircraft disinsection is the way to address this problem [117].

Conclusions

COVID-xix is the worst pandemic in calibration and speed of this century associated with the highest number of global deaths, with most of the deaths reported in high income countries. Take a chance factors such every bit increasing historic period, obesity, and comorbidities including pulmonary diseases, diabetes, cancer and neurological diseases bulldoze the infection fatality charge per unit. Although the infection fatality charge per unit is far lower compared to other emerging infectious diseases such as Ebola or xanthous fever, the global toll in terms of deaths is far college due to its propensity of high secondary assault rates with a high bones reproduction number. Its rapid spread via air travel effectually the world was relentless despite early on travel restrictions and travel bans. Even so, travel restrictions delayed the importation and reduced the outbreak size. Mobility restrictions continue to be used beyond countries. Due to the high reproduction number, combating COVID-19 will require an all-society and all-government approach.

In dissimilarity, travel restrictions for arboviral diseases will be ineffective every bit the focus is on vector control. The re-emergence of measles requires addressing declining vaccine coverage rates, and volition not require travel restrictions. Emerging infectious such as Ebola, monkeypox, and poliomyelitis will not do good from travel restrictions as the risk of spread via travel is minimal, and effective tools in terms of vaccines are available. H1N1 every bit a respiratory pathogen was spread rapidly effectually the globe, fifty-fifty faster than COVID-xix, simply is associated with a much lower infection fatality rate, and was less driven by clustering effects and mass gatherings than COVID-19.

Availability of data and materials

All available

References

1. Jones KE, Patel NG, Levy MA, Storeygard A, Balk D, Gittleman JL, et al. Global trends in emerging infectious diseases. Nature. 2008;451(7181):990–three.

   CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

2. Wilder-Smith A, Gubler DJ. Geographic expansion of dengue: the impact of international travel. Med Clin North Am. 2008;92(vi):1377–90, x.

   PubMed  Commodity  Google Scholar

3. Semenza JC, Ebi KL. Climate change touch on on migration, travel, travel destinations and the tourism manufacture. J Travel Med. 2019;26(5).

4. Schwerdtle PN, Bowen K, McMichael C, Sauerborn R. Human mobility and health in a warming world. J Travel Med. 2019;26(1).

5. Wilder-Smith A, Freedman Do. Isolation, quarantine, social distancing and customs containment: pivotal role for old-style public health measures in the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. J Travel Med. 2020;27(2).

6. Vaidya R, Herten-Crabb A, Spencer J, Moon South, Lillywhite L. Travel restrictions and communicable diseases outbreaks. J Travel Med. 2020;27(three).

7. Ng OW, Tan YJ. Understanding bat SARS-like coronaviruses for the training of future coronavirus outbreaks - implications for coronavirus vaccine development. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2017;13(1):186–nine.

   PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

8. Wilder-Smith A, Chiew CJ, Lee VJ. Can we contain the COVID-19 outbreak with the same measures equally for SARS? Lancet Infect Dis. 2020;20(5):e102–e7.

   CAS  PubMed  PubMed Cardinal  Article  Google Scholar

9. Jia HP, Expect DC, Shi L, Hickey M, Pewe L, Netland J, et al. ACE2 receptor expression and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection depend on differentiation of man airway epithelia. J Virol. 2005;79(23):14614–21.

   CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

10. Zhu N, Zhang D, Wang W, Li 10, Yang B, Song J, et al. A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in Mainland china, 2019. Engl J Med. 2020;382(viii):727-33. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017.

11. Liu Y, Gayle AA, Wilder-Smith A, Rocklov J. The reproductive number of COVID-19 is higher compared to SARS coronavirus. J Travel Med. 2020;27(2):taaa021. https://doi.org/x.1093/jtm/taaa021.

12. Pequeno P, Mendel B, Rosa C, Bosholn One thousand, Souza JL, Baccaro F, et al. Air transportation, population density and temperature predict the spread of COVID-xix in Brazil. PeerJ. 2020;eight:e9322.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

13. Rocklov J, Sjodin H. High population densities catalyse the spread of COVID-xix. J Travel Med. 2020;27(iii).

14. Mat NFC, Edinur HA, Razab G, Safuan Due south. A single mass gathering resulted in massive transmission of COVID-19 infections in Malaysia with further international spread. J Travel Med. 2020;27(three):taaa059. https://doi.org/x.1093/jtm/taaa059.

15. Rajasekharan Nayar K, Fazaludeen Koya S, Mohandas Thousand, Sivasankaran Nair S, Chitra GA, Abraham Thou, et al. Public wellness implications of Sabarimala mass gathering in India: a multi-dimensional analysis. Travel Med Infect Dis. 2020;37:101783.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

16. Wilder-Smith A, Bar-Yam Y, Fisher D. Lockdown to contain COVID-nineteen is a window of opportunity to foreclose the second wave. J Travel Med. 2020;27(v).

17. Memish ZA. Call to activeness for improved instance definition and contact tracing for MERS-CoV. J Travel Med. 2019;26(5).

18. Memish ZA, Al-Tawfiq JA, Alhakeem RF, Assiri A, Alharby KD, Almahallawi MS, et al. Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV): a cluster assay with implications for global management of suspected cases. Travel Med Infect Dis. 2015;xiii(4):311–4.

    PubMed  PubMed Cardinal  Article  Google Scholar

19. Memish ZA, Cotten One thousand, Meyer B, Watson SJ, Alsahafi AJ, Al Rabeeah AA, et al. Man infection with MERS coronavirus after exposure to infected camels, Saudi arabia, 2013. Emerg Infect Dis. 2014;xx(half dozen):1012–5.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

20. Yang J, Li J, Lai S, Ruktanonchai CW, Xing W, Carioli A, et al. Uncovering ii phases of early intercontinental COVID-19 manual dynamics. J Travel Med. 2020;27(viii):taaa200. https://doi.org/10.1093/jtm/taaa200.

21. Zhong P, Guo Due south, Chen T. Correlation between travellers departing from Wuhan earlier the Spring Festival and subsequent spread of COVID-xix to all provinces in Prc. J Travel Med. 2020;27(3).

22. Azad S, Devi S. Tracking the spread of COVID-19 in India via social networks in the early phase of the pandemic. J Travel Med. 2020;27(8):taaa130. https://doi.org/x.1093/jtm/taaa130.

23. Candido DDS, Watts A, Abade Fifty, Kraemer MUG, Pybus OG, Croda J, et al. Routes for COVID-xix importation in Brazil. J Travel Med. 2020;27(three).

24. Che Mat NF, Edinur HA, Abdul Razab MKA, Safuan S. A unmarried mass gathering resulted in massive manual of COVID-19 infections in Malaysia with further international spread. J Travel Med. 2020;27(three).

25. Lau H, Khosrawipour Five, Kocbach P, Mikolajczyk A, Schubert J, Bania J, et al. The positive impact of lockdown in Wuhan on containing the COVID-xix outbreak in China. J Travel Med. 2020;27(iii).

26. Costantino Five, Heslop DJ, MacIntyre CR. The effectiveness of total and partial travel bans confronting COVID-19 spread in Australia for travellers from Red china during and after the epidemic peak in Mainland china. J Travel Med. 2020;27(5):taaa081. https://doi.org/x.1093/jtm/taaa081.

27. Clifford Southward, Pearson CAB, Klepac P, Van Zandvoort K, Quilty BJ, group CC-w, et al. Effectiveness of interventions targeting air travellers for delaying local outbreaks of SARS-CoV-ii. J Travel Med. 2020.

28. Yang CH, Jung H. Topological dynamics of the 2022 South Korea MERS-CoV spread-on-contact networks. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):4327.

    PubMed  PubMed Primal  Article  CAS  Google Scholar

29. Wilder-Smith A, Osman S. Public health emergencies of international concern: a historic overview. J Travel Med. 2020;27(viii):taaa227. https://doi.org/x.1093/jtm/taaa227.

30. Plotkin SO, WA. Offit, PA. Edwards KM. Plotkin'southward Vaccines. 7th edition ed: Elsevier.

31. Knopf L, Steffen R. Revised recommendations for rabies pre-exposure prophylaxis in travellers: avoid bumpy roads, select the highway! J Travel Med. 2019;26(3).

32. Marano C, Moodley Thousand, Melander Due east, De Moerlooze Fifty, Nothdurft Hd. Perceptions of rabies risk: a survey of travellers and travel clinics from Canada, Deutschland, Sweden and the UK. J Travel Med. 2019;26(Suppl ane):S3–ix.

    PubMed  Commodity  Google Scholar

33. Jernigan JA, Stephens DS, Ashford DA, Omenaca C, Topiel MS, Galbraith Thou, et al. Bioterrorism-related inhalational anthrax: the showtime 10 cases reported in the United States. Emerg Infect Dis. 2001;seven(half-dozen):933–44.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Commodity  Google Scholar

34. Genton B. Ebola vaccines: ready to utilise for humanitarian health workers? J Travel Med. 2019;26(5).

35. Henao-Restrepo AM, Longini IM, Egger M, Dean NE, Edmunds WJ, Camacho A, et al. Efficacy and effectiveness of an rVSV-vectored vaccine expressing Ebola surface glycoprotein: interim results from the Guinea band vaccination cluster-randomised trial. Lancet. 2015;386(9996):857–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

36. [Bachelor from: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/ebola/drc-2019.

37. Bogoch 2, Creatore MI, Cetron MS, Brownstein JS, Pesik N, Miniota J, et al. Assessment of the potential for international dissemination of Ebola virus via commercial air travel during the 2022 west African outbreak. Lancet. 2015;385(9962):29–35.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

38. Tuite AR, Watts AG, Khan Yard, Bogoch 2. Ebola virus outbreak in Due north Kivu and Ituri provinces, Democratic Democracy of Congo, and the potential for further manual through commercial air travel. J Travel Med. 2019;26(7).

39. Young Exist, Wilder-Smith A. Flu on cruise ships. J Travel Med. 2018;25(1).

40. Mangili A, Gendreau MA. Transmission of infectious diseases during commercial air travel. Lancet. 2005;365(9463):989–96.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

41. Brockwell-Staats C, Webster RG, Webby RJ. Diverseness of influenza viruses in swine and the emergence of a novel human pandemic influenza a (H1N1). Flu Other Respir Viruses. 2009;3(v):207–13.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

42. Flahault A. Global monitoring of influenza: potential contribution of national networks from a French perspective. Expert Rev Anti-Infect Ther. 2006;4(3):387–93.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

43. Khan K, Arino J, Hu W, Raposo P, Sears J, Calderon F, et al. Spread of a novel influenza a (H1N1) virus via global airline transportation. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(2):212–iv.

    CAS  PubMed  Commodity  Google Scholar

44. Chong KC, Ying Zee BC. Modeling the impact of air, sea, and country travel restrictions supplemented by other interventions on the emergence of a new flu pandemic virus. BMC Infect Dis. 2012;12:309.

    PubMed  PubMed Primal  Article  Google Scholar

45. Grais RF, Ellis JH, Kress A, Glass GE. Modeling the spread of annual flu epidemics in the U.Due south.: the potential function of air travel. Wellness Care Manag Sci. 2004;7(2):127–34.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

46. Lee VJ, Lye DC, Wilder-Smith A. Combination strategies for pandemic influenza response - a systematic review of mathematical modeling studies. BMC Med. 2009;7:76.

    PubMed  PubMed Key  Article  Google Scholar

47. Malone JD, Brigantic R, Muller GA, Gadgil A, Delp W, McMahon BH, et al. U.S. airport entry screening in response to pandemic flu: modeling and analysis. Travel Med Infect Dis. 2009;7(4):181–91.

    PubMed  PubMed Key  Article  Google Scholar

48. Cowling BJ, Lau LL, Wu P, Wong HW, Fang VJ, Riley S, et al. Entry screening to filibuster local manual of 2009 pandemic flu a (H1N1). BMC Infect Dis. 2010;10:82.

    PubMed  PubMed Key  Article  Google Scholar

49. Yu H, Cauchemez Southward, Donnelly CA, Zhou Fifty, Feng L, Xiang N, et al. Transmission dynamics, edge entry screening, and schoolhouse holidays during the 2009 influenza a (H1N1) pandemic, Cathay. Emerg Infect Dis. 2012;18(5):758–66.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

50. Cooper BS, Pitman RJ, Edmunds WJ, Gay NJ. Delaying the international spread of pandemic flu. PLoS Med. 2006;iii(6):e212.

    PubMed  PubMed Cardinal  Article  Google Scholar

51. Strebel PM, Orenstein WA. Measles. Northward Engl J Med. 2019.

52. Measles vaccines: WHO position paper – Apr 2017. WEEKLY EPIDEMIOLOGICAL RECORD, NO 17, 28 April 2017. 2017;17(92):205–228.

    Google Scholar

53. HQ ML, Fiebelkorn AP, Temte JL, Wallace GS, Centers for Illness C, Prevention. Prevention of measles, rubella, congenital rubella syndrome, and mumps, 2013: summary recommendations of the Informational Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR Recomm Rep. 2013;62(RR-04):1–34.

    Google Scholar

54. Global Vaccine Activeness Program 2011–2020 [Available from: https://www.who.int/immunization/global_vaccine_action_plan/GVAP_doc_2011_2020/en/.

55. Heywood AE. Measles: a re-emerging problem in migrants and travellers. J Travel Med. 2018;25(ane).

56. Torres JR, Castro JS. Venezuela'south migration crunch: a growing health threat to the region requiring immediate attending. J Travel Med. 2019;26(2).

57. Tuite AR, Thomas-Bachli A, Acosta H, Bhatia D, Huber C, Petrasek One thousand, et al. Communicable diseases implications of large-calibration migration of Venezuelan nationals. J Travel Med. 2018;25(1).

58. Fujita DM, Salvador FS, Nali L, Luna EJA. Decreasing vaccine coverage rates lead to increased vulnerability to the importation of vaccine-preventable diseases in Brazil. J Travel Med. 2018;25(1).

59. Elimination measles and rubella framework in the WHO European Region 2022 [Available from: http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/247356/Eliminating-measles-and-rubella-Framework-for-the-verification-process-in-the-WHO-European-Region.pdf.

60. Leong WY. Measles cases hit record loftier in Europe in 2018. J Travel Med. 2018;25(one).

61. Massad Due east. Measles and human being move in Europe. J Travel Med. 2018;25(ane).

62. Mahase Due east. Measles cases rise 300% globally in kickoff few months of 2019. BMJ. 2019;365:l1810.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

63. Nicolay Due north, Mirinaviciute G, Mollet T, Celentano LP, Bacci S. Epidemiology of measles during the COVID-xix pandemic, a clarification of the surveillance data, 29 European union/EEA countries and the Great britain, January to May 2020. Euro Surveill. 2020;25(31).

64. Pavli A, Maltezou H. Health problems of newly arrived migrants and refugees in Europe. J Travel Med. 2017;24(four).

65. Yameogo KR, Perry RT, Yameogo A, Kambire C, Konde MK, Nshimirimana D, et al. Migration as a run a risk factor for measles after a mass vaccination campaign, Burkina Faso, 2002. Int J Epidemiol. 2005;34(three):556–64.

    PubMed  Commodity  Google Scholar

66. Ceccarelli Chiliad, Vita S, Riva E, Cella E, Lopalco M, Antonelli F, et al. Susceptibility to measles in migrant population: implication for policy makers. J Travel Med. 2018;25(1).

67. Greenaway C, Castelli F. Infectious diseases at different stages of migration: an good review. J Travel Med. 2019;26(2).

68. Greenaway C, Castelli F, et al. J Travel Med. 2019;26(2).

69. Boggild AK, Geduld J, Libman M, Yansouni CP, McCarthy AE, Hajek J, et al. Spectrum of disease in migrants to Canada: sentinel surveillance through CanTravNet. J Travel Med. 2019;26(ii).

70. Heywood AE, Lopez-Velez R. Reducing infectious illness inequities amidst migrants. J Travel Med. 2019;26(2).

71. Heywood AE, Zwar Northward. Improving admission and provision of pre-travel healthcare for travellers visiting friends and relatives: a review of the evidence. J Travel Med. 2018;25(ane).

72. Shetty South, Murmann M, Tuite AR, Watts AG, Bogoch I, Khan K. Measles and the 2022 Hajj: run a risk of international transmission. J Travel Med 2019;26(6).

73. Angelo KM, Libman 1000, Gautret P, Barnett East, Grobusch MP, Hagmann SHF, et al. The rise in travel-associated measles infections-GeoSentinel, 2015–2019. J Travel Med. 2019;26(half dozen).

74. Memish ZA, Khan AA, Ebrahim S. Measles and the 2022 Hajj: the take chances of magnifying the global measles surge. J Travel Med. 2019;26(6).

75. Leong WY, Wilder-Smith AB. Measles resurgence in Europe: migrants and travellers are not the Master drivers. J Epidemiol Glob Health. 2019;ix(4):294–nine.

    PubMed  PubMed Primal  Commodity  Google Scholar

76. de Swart RL, Takeda Grand. Editorial overview: combating measles during a COVID-nineteen pandemic. Curr Opin Virol. 2020;41:iii–7.

    PubMed  Commodity  CAS  Google Scholar

77. Nachega JB, Mbala-Kingebeni P, Otshudiema J, Zumla A, Tam-Fum JM. The colliding epidemics of COVID-19, Ebola, and measles in the Democratic Congo-brazzaville. Lancet Glob Health. 2020;8(8):e991–e2.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

78. Kain D, Findlater A, Lightfoot D, Maxim T, Kraemer MUG, Brady OJ, et al. Factors Affecting Pre-Travel Health Seeking Behaviour and Adherence to Pre-Travel Wellness Advice: A Systematic Review. J Travel Med. 2019;26(vi).

79. Paudel P, Raina C, Zwar N, Seale H, Worth H, Sheikh M, et al. Risk activities and pre-travel health seeking practices of notified cases of imported infectious diseases in Australia. J Travel Med. 2017;24(5).

80. Massad East, Wilder-Smith AB, Wilder-Smith A, Memish ZA. Modelling the importation chance of measles during the hajj. Lancet Infect Dis. 2019;nineteen(eight):806.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

81. Bednarczyk RA, Rebolledo PA, Omer SB. Assessment of the function of international travel and unauthorized immigration on measles importation to the Usa. J Travel Med. 2016;23(3).

82. Chard AN, Datta SD, Tallis G, Burns CC, Wassilak SGF, Vertefeuille JF, et al. Progress toward polio eradication - worldwide, January 2018-march 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(25):784–ix.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

83. Wilder-Smith A, Leong WY, Lopez LF, Amaku M, Quam M, Khan Yard, et al. Potential for international spread of wild poliovirus via travelers. BMC Med. 2015;13:133.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

84. Petersen E, Abubakar I, Ihekweazu C, Heymann D, Ntoumi F, Blumberg 50, et al. Monkeypox - enhancing public health preparedness for an emerging lethal human zoonotic epidemic threat in the wake of the smallpox mail-eradication era. Int J Infect Dis. 2019;78:78–84.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

85. Angelo KM, Petersen BW, Hamer DH, Schwartz E, Brunette G. Monkeypox manual amid international travellers-serious monkey business? J Travel Med. 2019;26(five).

86. Buchman GW, Cohen ME, Xiao Y, Richardson-Harman Northward, Silvera P, DeTolla LJ, et al. A protein-based smallpox vaccine protects non-human primates from a lethal monkeypox virus claiming. Vaccine. 2010;28(xl):6627–36.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

87. Heymann DL, Wilder-Smith A. Successful smallpox eradication: what tin nosotros learn to control COVID-19? J Travel Med. 2020;27(iv).

88. Bernard SM, Anderson SA. Qualitative assessment of risk for monkeypox associated with domestic trade in sure animal species, United States. Emerg Infect Dis. 2006;12(12):1827–33.

    PubMed  PubMed Fundamental  Article  Google Scholar

89. Wilder-Smith A, Gubler DJ, Weaver SC, Monath TP, Heymann DL, Scott TW. Epidemic arboviral diseases: priorities for research and public wellness. Lancet Infect Dis. 2017;17(3):e101–e6.

    PubMed  Commodity  Google Scholar

90. Lillepold K, Rocklov J, Liu-Helmersson J, Sewe M, Semenza JC. More arboviral disease outbreaks in continental Europe due to the warming climate? J Travel Med. 2019;26(v).

91. Struchiner CJ, Rocklov J, Wilder-Smith A, Massad E. Increasing dengue incidence in Singapore over the past 40 years: population growth, Climate and Mobility. PLoS I. 2015;x(viii):e0136286.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar

92. Barrett ADT. West Nile in Europe: an increasing public wellness problem. J Travel Med. 2018;25(1).

93. Pearce JC, Learoyd TP, Langendorf BJ, Logan JG. Japanese encephalitis: the vectors, environmental and potential for expansion. J Travel Med. 2018;25(suppl_1):S16–26.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

94. Weaver SC, Charlier C, Vasilakis Due north, Lecuit Grand. Zika, Chikungunya, and other emerging vector-borne viral diseases. Annu Rev Med. 2018;69:395–408.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

95. Sanchez Clemente Due north, Brickley EB, Paixao ES, De Almeida MF, Gazeta RE, Vedovello D, et al. Zika virus infection in pregnancy and adverse fetal outcomes in Sao Paulo state, Brazil: a prospective cohort study. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):12673.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

96. Wilder-Smith A, Wei Y, Araujo TVB, VanKerkhove M, Turchi Martelli CM, Turchi Doc, et al. Agreement the relation betwixt Zika virus infection during pregnancy and adverse fetal, infant and child outcomes: a protocol for a systematic review and individual participant information meta-analysis of longitudinal studies of pregnant women and their infants and children. BMJ Open. 2019;9(6):e026092.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

97. Chen LH, Hamer DH. Zika virus and sexual transmission: updated preconception guidance. J Travel Med. 2018;25(1).

98. Vouga M, Chiu YC, Pomar L, de Meyer SV, Masmejan S, Genton B, et al. Dengue, Zika and chikungunya during pregnancy: pre- and mail service-travel communication and clinical management. J Travel Med. 2019;26(8).

99. Wilder-Smith A, Ooi EE, Horstick O, Wills B. Dengue. Lancet. 2019;393(10169):350–63.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

100. Halstead S, Wilder-Smith A. Severe dengue in travellers: pathogenesis, chance and clinical direction. J Travel Med. 2019;26(seven).

101. Jacques C, Bernard-Alex G, Fabrice S. Lessons learned from the health crisis caused by the chikungunya epidemic on Reunion Island in 2005–2006. Med Trop (Mars). 2012;72:Spec No:4–5.

     Google Scholar

102. Ho YL, Joelsons D, Leite GFC, Malbouisson LMS, Vocal ATW, Perondi B, et al. Severe yellow fever in Brazil: clinical characteristics and management. J Travel Med. 2019;26(5).

103. Huang Z, Das A, Qiu Y, Tatem AJ. Spider web-based GIS: the vector-borne affliction airline importation hazard (VBD-AIR) tool. Int J Health Geogr. 2012;xi:33.

     PubMed  PubMed Primal  Article  Google Scholar

104. Lopez LF, Amaku M, Coutinho FA, Quam M, Burattini MN, Struchiner CJ, et al. Modeling importations and exportations of infectious diseases via travelers. Bull Math Biol. 2016;78(2):185–209.

     PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

105. Quam MB, Khan K, Sears J, Hu West, Rocklov J, Wilder-Smith A. Estimating air travel-associated importations of dengue virus into Italian republic. J Travel Med. 2015;22(3):186–93.

     PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

106. Sessions OM, Khan One thousand, Hou Y, Meltzer E, Quam M, Schwartz Due east, et al. Exploring the origin and potential for spread of the 2013 dengue outbreak in Luanda, Angola. Glob Wellness Action. 2013;six:21822.

     PubMed  Article  Google Scholar

107. Glaesser D, Kester J, Paulose H, Alizadeh A, Valentin B. Global travel patterns: an overview. J Travel Med. 2017;24(4).

108. Adalja AA, Sell TK, Bouri Northward, Franco C. Lessons learned during dengue outbreaks in the United States, 2001-2011. Emerg Infect Dis. 2012;xviii(4):608–xiv.

     PubMed  PubMed Primal  Commodity  Google Scholar

109. La Ruche G, Souares Y, Armengaud A, Peloux-Petiot F, Delaunay P, Despres P, et al. First ii autochthonous dengue virus infections in metropolitan France, September 2010. Euro Surveill. 2010;15(39):19676.

     PubMed  Google Scholar

110. Gjenero-Margan I, Aleraj B, Krajcar D, Lesnikar V, Klobucar A, Pem-Novosel I, et al. Autochthonous dengue fever in Croatia, August–September 2010. Euro Surveill. 2011;16(ix).

111. Wilder-Smith A, Quam Yard, Sessions O, Rocklov J, Liu-Helmersson J, Franco L, et al. The 2012 dengue outbreak in Madeira: exploring the origins. Euro Surveill. 2014;19(eight):20718.

     CAS  PubMed  Commodity  Google Scholar

112. Massad E, Amaku G, Coutinho FAB, Struchiner CJ, Burattini MN, Khan Chiliad, et al. Estimating the probability of dengue virus introduction and secondary autochthonous cases in Europe. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):4629.

     PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar

113. Neumayr A, Munoz J, Schunk Chiliad, Bottieau E, Cramer J, Calleri G, et al. Sentinel surveillance of imported dengue via travellers to Europe 2012 to 2014: TropNet data from the DengueTools research initiative. Euro Surveill. 2017;22(1).

114. Liu-Helmersson J, Quam Yard, Wilder-Smith A, Stenlund H, Ebi K, Massad East, et al. Climate change and Aedes vectors: 21st century projections for dengue transmission in Europe. EBioMedicine. 2016;7:267–77.

     PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar

115. Khan K, Bogoch I, Brownstein JS, Miniota J, Nicolucci A, Hu W, et al. Assessing the origin of and potential for international spread of chikungunya virus from the Caribbean area. PLoS Curr. 2014;6.

116. Wilder-Smith A, Leong WY. Importation of yellow fever into China: assessing travel patterns. J Travel Med. 2017;24(iv).

117. Grout A, Russell RC. Aircraft disinsection: what is the usefulness equally a public health measure? J Travel Med. 2020;taaa124. https://doi.org/x.1093/jtm/taaa124.

118. Freedman Exercise, Wilder-Smith A. In-flight transmission of SARS-CoV-ii: a review of the set on rates and available data on the efficacy of face masks. J Travel Med. 2020;27(eight):taaa178. https://doi.org/10.1093/jtm/taaa178.

119. Khatib AN, Carvalho AM, Primavesi R, To 1000, Poirier V. Navigating the risks of flying during COVID-nineteen: a review for condom air travel. J Travel Med. 2020;27(8):taaa212. https://doi.org/x.1093/jtm/taaa212.

Download references

Acknowledgements

No funding received.

Author information

Affiliations

1. Department of Illness Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United kingdom

   A. Wilder-Smith

2. Heidelberg Constitute of Global Wellness, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

   A. Wilder-Smith

Contributions

AWS wrote the paper. The author(due south) read and approved the last manuscript.

Corresponding writer

Correspondence to A. Wilder-Smith.

Ethics declarations

Ideals approving and consent to participate

Not required, as this is a review commodity. No subjects involved.

Consent for publication

Yes

Competing interests

None declared

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open up Access This article is licensed under a Artistic Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, accommodation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, equally long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(due south) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and bespeak if changes were made. The images or other third party fabric in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is non included in the commodity's Creative Commons licence and your intended utilise is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, yous will need to obtain permission straight from the copyright holder. To view a re-create of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Artistic Eatables Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/goose egg/ane.0/) applies to the data made available in this commodity, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

Nigh this article

Cite this article

Wilder-Smith, A. COVID-nineteen in comparing with other emerging viral diseases: risk of geographic spread via travel. Trop Dis Travel Med Vaccines 7, 3 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40794-020-00129-9

Download commendation

• Received: xix November 2020

• Accepted: 26 December 2020

• Published: 31 January 2021

• DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40794-020-00129-ix

Keywords

• SARS
• Measles
• Dengue
• Zika
• Chikungunya
• Yellow fever
• West Nile encephalitis
• Japanese encephalitis
• Ebola
• Monkeypox

bennettsuddeas.blogspot.com

Source: https://tdtmvjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40794-020-00129-9

Share this post