1 Within the same time period (1987–2007), travel from elsewhere to the UK has been estimated to double from around 16 to 32 million visits, 4.5 million originating

from outside North America or Europe.1 Several groups have reviewed the changes in patterns and increasing frequency of infections imported to the UK by travelers and the implications for British hospitals.2–6 The importance of taking a travel history to establish the possibility of imported this website infection was emphasized almost 50 years ago by Maegraith in his classical publication “Unde venis?” (Where do you come from?).7 However, anecdotal experience suggests that questions about travel are still omitted from most routine medical histories. There are few published data on whether British check details health care workers take adequate travel histories and act upon them. In a study in an accident and emergency (A&E) setting, travel histories were only recorded in 2% of over 900 patient attendances in 1 week and in only 5.3% of 310 patients with non-traumatic conditions, ie, those with the potential of having an imported

disease.8 The absence of a travel history may affect patient management and also has wider public health implications. British guidelines on the management and control of viral hemorrhagic fevers9 rely almost solely on epidemiological evidence such as an appropriate travel history, and similar risk assessment algorithms have been developed for emerging infections such as severe acute respiratory syndrome,10 drug-resistant tuberculosis,11 and pandemic influenza.12 International surveillance has shown that most patients with travel-related diseases present with gastrointestinal symptoms, fever, or skin disorders.13 The aim of this study was to determine Farnesyltransferase how often generalists documented travel histories from patients admitted to emergency and acute medical units (AMU) with these sentinel presenting syndromes. The secondary aim was to assess the adequacy of these histories to guide patient and public health management. All patients admitted over two sequential months in 2008 to the

AMU of a Northwestern teaching hospital and a district general hospital, with a history including at least one of fever, rash, diarrhea/vomiting, jaundice, or being “unwell post-travel,” were included. Patients were retrospectively identified from clinical coding and ward databases in one center and were prospectively identified by reviewing the case notes of all new admissions to the AMU (independent of route) on a daily basis in the other hospital. The initial clerking recorded in the case notes was assessed using an agreed proforma by two independent assessors. The grade and type of professional taking the initial history, the route of referral, and the general demographics of the patient were recorded. If present, the travel history was reviewed for key travel-related information (Table 1). Patients seen initially by infectious diseases physicians were excluded from the analysis.