Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Epidemic intelligence meeting
Transcript
The epidemic intelligence meeting Katrine Borgen Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology Norwegian Institute of Public Health EpiTrain V, Vilnius October 2007 Epidemic intelligence • Conseptual framework • Systematic – collection – verification – communication of information on potential health threats Objective • Detect/identify • Verify • Rapidly assess …information on potential (inter)national health threats, which may affect populations in your country or your country’s nationals worldwide Recommend public health measures! Event-based surveillance Indicator-based surveillance Report Data Collect Analyse Interpret Capture Filter Verify Signal Who & how? Assess Disseminate Public health alert Investigate Control measures National & International How do we practically do this? Organising epidemic intelligence • • • • • Regular meetings Quality control systems Outbreak responsible unit Data base for possible threats Bulletin for reporting threats The epidemic intelligence meeting Structure • • • • • • Participants Frequency and duration Information sources Reporting Target group Evaluation Participants • Laboratory • Epidemiology • Authorities • Specialists? • Decision makers? Feasible Limit no. of participants Frequency • Weekly • Monthly • When ”needed” • Where should the meeting be held? Information sources National International • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Surveillance systems Early warning system Laboratories Clinicians Participants Networks Media WHO – IHR ECDC EWRS NGOs Disease networks Eurosurveillance ProMED Literature How, what and when to report? • Written summary • All alerts or only assessed alerts? • Timely distribution by e-mail the same day • Confidentiality? Who receives the report? • Participants • National authorities • Public health professionals – National, regional, local level • Other partners? – Depending on the alerts – International counterparts Evaluation • Does the meeting meet its objective? • Are alerts assessed appropriately and timely? • Changes in structure according to needs? Dutch example • Since 1999 at National Public Health Inst. • Weekly early warning committee meetings – – – – Medical microbiologists Infectious disease epidemiologists Food authorities national level National coordination centre infectious disease • Participants report possible alerts • Assess alerts – recommend action • Report The IHR surveillance system Mass media, GPHIN, MediSYS, Google, NGOs, ProMED etc + other countries Local level National IHR Focal Point WHO IHR Obligations to build capacities Article 5+13 and Annex 1A Epidemic intelligence • Detect events • Report events • Assess events • Notify events to WHO • Respond to events Communications within IHR Surveillance responsible Public health services National IHR Focal Point WHO EURO IHR Focal Point Points of entry Clinics and hospitals The Epidemic intelligence meeting is one way to structure this communication
