Airport exit and entry screening for Ebola--August-November 10, 2014.

In response to the largest recognized Ebola virus disease epidemic now occurring in West Africa, the governments of affected countries, CDC, the World Health Organization (WHO), and other international organizations have collaborated to implement strategies to control spread of the virus. One strategy recommended by WHO calls for countries with Ebola transmission to screen all persons exiting the country for "unexplained febrile illness consistent with potential Ebola infection." Exit screening at points of departure is intended to reduce the likelihood of international spread of the virus. To initiate this strategy, CDC, WHO, and other global partners were invited by the ministries of health of Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone to assist them in developing and implementing exit screening procedures. Since the program began in August 2014, an estimated 80,000 travelers, of whom approximately 12,000 were en route to the United States, have departed by air from the three countries with Ebola transmission. Procedures were implemented to deny boarding to ill travelers and persons who reported a high risk for exposure to Ebola; no international air traveler from these countries has been reported as symptomatic with Ebola during travel since these procedures were implemented.

African-American children are at risk of a measles outbreak in an inner-city community of Chicago, 2000.

BACKGROUND: Since the measles resurgence of 1989-1991, which affected predominantly inner-city preschoolers, national vaccination rates have risen to record-high levels, but rates among inner-city, preschool-aged, African-American children lag behind national rates. The threat of measles importations from abroad exists and may be particularly important in large U.S. cities. To stop epidemic transmission, measles vaccination coverage should be at least 80%. OBJECTIVE: To determine measles vaccination rates and predictors for having received a dose of measles-containing vaccine by age 19 to 35 months among children in an inner-city community of Chicago. METHODS: We used a cross-sectional survey with probability proportional to size cluster sampling. Immunization histories from parent-held records and providers were combined to establish a complete vaccination history. RESULTS: A total of 2545 households were contacted, and 170 included a resident child aged 12 to 35 months. Of these, 97% (N=165 children) agreed to participate. Immunization history from a parent or provider was not available for 20 children. Among children aged 19 to 35 months with available immunization histories, 74% received measles vaccine (n=100); of these, 84% received the vaccine as recommended at ages 12 to 15 months. However, when including children without immunization histories, measles coverage levels among children aged 19 to 35 months were 64% (n=114). Among children with records, predictors for receipt of measles vaccine by age 19 to 35 months were possessing a hand-held immunization card (odds ratio [OR]=16.8; 95% confidence interval [CI]=4.2-67.1); utilizing a public health department provider for a usual source of care (OR=8.9; 95% CI=1.6-47.2); and being up-to-date for vaccines at 3 months of age (OR=5.0; 95% CI=1.8-14.1). CONCLUSIONS: Optimistically assuming that children without immunization histories are as well immunized as children with immunization histories, the measles vaccination rate among Englewood's children aged 19 to 35 months is too low to maintain immunity (74%). Measles coverage levels lagged behind coverage reported in a national survey in Chicago (86%) and the nation as a whole (92%). Efforts to raise and sustain coverage should be undertaken.