-
Anna Chu,
Rachel Savage, Don Willison,
Natasha S Crowcroft,
Laura C Rosella,
Doug Sider,
Jason Garay,
Ian Gemmill,
Anne-Luise Winter,
Richard F Davies,
Ian Johnson
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Although an increasing number of studies are documenting uses of syndromic surveillance by front line public health, few detail the value added from linking syndromic data to public health decision-making. This study seeks to understand how syndromic data informed specific public health actions during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. METHODS: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with participants from Ontario's public health departments, the provincial ministry of health and federal public health agency to gather information about syndromic surveillance systems used and the role of syndromic data in informing specific public health actions taken during the pandemic. Responses were compared with how the same decisions were made by non-syndromic surveillance users. RESULTS: Findings from 56 interviews (82% response) show that syndromic data was most used for monitoring virus activity, measuring impact on the health care system and informing the opening of influenza assessment centres in several jurisdictions, and supporting communications and messaging, rather than its intended purpose of early outbreak detection. Syndromic data had limited impact on decisions that involved the operation of immunization clinics, school closures, sending information letters home with school children or providing recommendations to health care providers. Both syndromic surveillance users and non-users reported that guidance from the provincial ministry of health, communications with stakeholders and vaccine availability were driving factors in these public health decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Syndromic surveillance had limited use in decision-making during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic in Ontario. This study provides insights into the reasons why this occurred. Despite this, syndromic data were valued for providing situational awareness and confidence to support public communications and recommendations. Developing an understanding of how syndromic data is utilized during public health events provides valuable evidence to support future investments in public health surveillance.
BMC Public Health 10/2012; 12(1):929. · 2.00 Impact Factor
-
Rachel Savage,
Anna Chu,
Laura C Rosella,
Natasha S Crowcroft,
Monali Varia,
Michelle E Policarpio,
Norman G Vinson,
Anne-Luise Winter,
Karen Hay,
Richard F Davies,
Ian Gemmill, Don Willison,
Ian Johnson
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Despite the growing popularity of syndromic surveillance, little is known about if or how these systems are accepted, utilized and valued by end users. This study seeks to describe the use of syndromic surveillance systems in Ontario and users' perceptions of the value of these systems within the context of other surveillance systems.
Ontario's 36 public health units, the provincial ministry of health and federal public health agency completed a web survey to identify traditional and syndromic surveillance systems used routinely and during the pandemic and to describe system attributes and utility in monitoring pandemic activity and informing decision-making.
Syndromic surveillance systems are used by 20/38 (53%) organizations. For routine surveillance, laboratory, integrated Public Health Information System and school absenteeism data are the most frequently used sources. Laboratory data received the highest ratings for reliability, timeliness and accuracy ('very acceptable' by 92, 51 and 89%). Hospital/clinic screening data were rated as the most reliable and timely syndromic data source (50 and 43%) and ED visit data the most accurate (48%). During the pandemic, laboratory data were considered the most useful for monitoring the epidemiology and informing decision-making while ED screening and visit data were considered the most useful syndromic sources.
End user perceptions are valuable for identifying opportunities for improvement and guiding further investments in public health surveillance.
Journal of Public Health 12/2011; 34(2):195-202. · 2.06 Impact Factor
-
Camille Achonu,
Laura Rosella,
Jonathan B Gubbay,
Shelley Deeks,
Anu Rebbapragada,
Tony Mazzulli, Don Willison,
Julie Foisy,
Allison McGeer,
Ian Johnson,
Marie LaFreniere,
Caitlin Johnson,
Jacqueline Willmore,
Carmen Yue,
Natasha S Crowcroft
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We designed a seroprevalence study using multiple testing assays and population sources to estimate the community seroprevalence of pH1N1/09 and risk factors for infection before the outbreak was recognized and throughout the pandemic to the end of 2009/10 influenza season.
Residual serum specimens from five time points (between 01/2009 and 05/2010) and samples from two time points from a prospectively recruited cohort were included. The distribution of risk factors was explored in multivariate adjusted analyses using logistic regression among the cohort. Antibody levels were measured by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and microneutralization (MN) assays.
Residual sera from 3375 patients and 1024 prospectively recruited cohort participants were analyzed. Pre-pandemic seroprevalence ranged from 2%-12% across age groups. Overall seropositivity ranged from 10%-19% post-first wave and 32%-41% by the end of the 2009/10 influenza season. Seroprevalence and risk factors differed between MN and HAI assays, particularly in older age groups and between waves. Following the H1N1 vaccination program, higher GMT were noted among vaccinated individuals. Overall, 20-30% of the population was estimated to be infected.
Combining population sources of sera across five time points with prospectively collected epidemiological information yielded a complete description of the evolution of pH1N1 infection.
PLoS ONE 01/2011; 6(11):e26427. · 4.09 Impact Factor
