Evaluation of the Dc Department of Health's Syndromic Surveillance System

Stoto, ­Michael A.; Jain, Arvind Kumar; Davies-Cole, John; Glymph, Chevelle

doi:10.1093/aje/163.suppl_11.s187-b

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…EDSyS systems developed in response to events of public health importance were implemented in response to infectious disease outbreaks (namely SARS [45][46][47]), terrorist events (September 2001 [48][49][50][51]) and natural disasters (heat wave [52]). The speed at which these systems were implemented was dependent on the level of immediate threat.…”

Section: The Rationale For the Development Of Edsys Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emergency department syndromic surveillance systems: a systematic review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Syndromic surveillance provides public health intelligence to aid in early warning and monitoring of public health impacts (e.g. seasonal influenza), or reassurance when an impact has not occurred. Using information collected during routine patient care, syndromic surveillance can be based on signs/symptoms/preliminary diagnoses. This approach makes syndromic surveillance much timelier than surveillance requiring laboratory confirmed diagnoses. The provision of healthcare services and patient access to them varies globally. However, emergency departments (EDs) exist worldwide, providing unscheduled urgent care to people in acute need. This provision of care makes ED syndromic surveillance (EDSyS) a potentially valuable tool for public health surveillance internationally. The objective of this study was to identify and describe the key characteristics of EDSyS systems that have been established and used globally. Methods We systematically reviewed studies published in peer review journals and presented at International Society of Infectious Disease Surveillance conferences (up to and including 2017) to identify EDSyS systems which have been created and used for public health purposes. Search criteria developed to identify “emergency department” and “syndromic surveillance” were applied to NICE healthcare, Global Health and Scopus databases. Results In total, 559 studies were identified as eligible for inclusion in the review, comprising 136 journal articles and 423 conference abstracts/papers. From these studies we identified 115 EDSyS systems in 15 different countries/territories across North America, Europe, Asia and Australasia. Systems ranged from local surveillance based on a single ED, to comprehensive national systems. National EDSyS systems were identified in 8 countries/territories: 2 reported inclusion of ≥85% of ED visits nationally (France and Taiwan). Conclusions EDSyS provides a valuable tool for the identification and monitoring of trends in severe illness. Technological advances, particularly in the emergency care patient record, have enabled the evolution of EDSyS over time. EDSyS reporting has become closer to ‘real-time’, with automated, secure electronic extraction and analysis possible on a daily, or more frequent basis. The dissemination of methods employed and evidence of successful application to public health practice should be encouraged to support learning from best practice, enabling future improvement, harmonisation and collaboration between systems in future. Prospero number CRD42017069150.

show abstract