Page 67 - Timeliness of Infectious Disease Notification & Response Systems - Corien Swaan

Timeliness of notification systems: a systematic literature review 65
3
Study number, author,
year country
Disease(s), Disease specific system +/ -
Study* Level of Method of reporting** reporting***
Reporting Delay described #
Predefined timeframe
Timely according predefined timeframe? S-P-I ##
Timely according standardized timeframe? S-P-I ##
22. Moore et al. 2008, US,
New York City, 37
Hepatitis A (-)
E Level 1 Mandatory
C/ E: ELR (1->35% in study period)
D3P, D3X
Timely enough to provide PEP to con- tacts (≤ 10 days of diagnosis of index)
D3P/X: S
D3P/X: I
23. Murray et al. 2013, US, California 38
Gonorrhoeae (-)
E Level 1 and Mandatory
2
C
D3P, D3X
D3P within 7 days. D3X within 1 business day.
D4: weekly reporting
D3P: I
D3P: I
24. Nazzal et al. 2011, Qatar 39
Measles (-) Several ID
E Level 1,2,3 Mandatory
C: Notification forms
D1 –D5 D2
WHO recommenda- tion: 80% < 2 days.
D1-5: I n.a.b
D1-5: S D2: P
25. Nguyen et al. 2007, US,
New York City, 40
E Level 1 Mandatory
E (ECLRS Electr clin lab report system) compared with paper reports.
Not available
26. Overhage et al. 2008, US, Indiana, 11
Several ID 10 ID
E Level 1 Mandatory
E: Automated ELR compared with C: paperbased
D3X D3X D3P
Not available Not available
n.a. n.a. D3P: I
n.a. D3X: P D3P: P
27. Panackal et al. 2002, US, Pennsylvania 13
E Level 1 Mandatory
E: Automated ELR compared with C: paperbased
28. Paranthaman et al. 2009, UK 41
Meningo- coccosis (-)
E Level 1 Mandatory
C/E: Paper and electronic forms
Immediately reporting to LHD.
Indirect: same day of admission
Notification system