Page 68 - Timeliness of Infectious Disease Notification & Response Systems - Corien Swaan

66 Chapter 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 ##
29. Pascopella et al. 2004, US, California 42
TB (-) Malaria (+)
E Level 1 Mandatory
unknown
D3X
D3P, D4+5
Within 1 working day.
D3X: S
D3P, D4+5:P
D3X: S
30. Quan et al. 2014, South Africa 43
I Level 2, Mandatory
C: paper forms. SMS/text mes- sages
D3P < 24 hrs. D4+5 <72 hrs
2 days between re- porting and follow up.
D3P: P, D4+5: S
31. Rajeev et al. 2011, US, Utah 44
Several ID
E Level 1 Mandatory
E: Electronic case reporting HL7 vs paper-based (com- parison)
D2
Immediately or within 3 working days de- pending on disease.
D2: P
D2: S
32. Ratnayake et al, 2013,
Canada 45
Meningococco- sis (-)
E Level 1 Mandatory
C: Telephone and fax
D2 (P&L)
D1, D3P, D4-5
Mandatory ‘prompt’, in study predefined timeframe: 7d
D2: S
D1, D3P: P
D2: S
D1, D3P: P
33. Reijn et al. 2008, Netherlands 46
6 ID
E Level 1 and L2-3
C L1: Fax, phone, paper card, L 2-3/ D4-5: E webbased.
D3P: ≤ 1 day, or ≤3 days when weekend interferes. D4-5: over- night. Study time- frame: 1-2 IP
34. Richard et al. 2008, Switzerland 47
Measles (+)
E Level 1 Manda-tory
C: e-mail
D1
L1/D2: MNS: clinical compatible cases: < 1 week
D1: I
D1: P
Mandatory
(MNS) vs Voluntary (SSSN)
Notification system