b two patients answered this question with ‘unknown’ c three patients answered this question with ‘unknown’ *P-value 0.356. ** Chi-square P-value 0.049, Fisher’s exact test P-value 0.070. Risk perception The majority of patients (n=176 out of 247; 71.3%) were aware that international travel could lead to carriage of HRMO. The majority of patients (221 out of 243; 90.9%) supported the idea to screen for HRMO upon hospital admission in case of a travel history; 4 patients (1.6%) did not answer this question. Traveling HRMO positive patients were less aware of the fact that traveling could lead to HRMO carriage (57.1% compared to 68.2%). Additionally, they were more careless with respect to perception of risk (Table 4). In both groups, approximately 86% supported the idea to screen for HRMO upon hospital admission in case of a travel history (Table 4). Table 4. Risk perception of traveling patients in relation to HRMO positivity at admission Opinion about risk of acquiring HRMO after travel HRMO-positive at admission, n=7 HRMO-negative at admission, n=110 Aware that travel could lead to HRMO acquisition (%) 4 (57.1) 75 (68.2) Risk of acquiring HRMO is no problem (%) 0 (0) 5 (4.5) Aware that travel comes with risks (%) 3 (42.9) 31 (28.2) Unpleasant, but will still travel (%) 1 (14.3) 57 (51.8) Risk of acquiring HRMO is scary (%) 1 (14.3) 7 (6.4) Other, or combination of answers (%) 2 (28.6) 10 (9.1) Hospitals should screen for HRMO in case of a travel history (%) 6 (85.7) 94a (86.2) Relevant differences in percentages indicated in bold text HRMO; highly resistant microorganism a one missing answer. Discussion Summary of evidence Our study showed that almost 50% of the patients admitted to the hospital travel, both within and outside of Europe. Overall, we did not show a difference in carriage rates at admission between travelling <1y to any country abroad and non-travelling patients. 2 61 Pre-COVID-19 international travel and addmission to hospital back home
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw