Evaluation of the American Red Cross Disaster-Related Mortality Surveillance System Using Hurricane Ike Data-Texas 2008

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia (Drs Farag and Bayleyegn and Mss Rey and Noe)
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness (Impact Factor: 0.7). 12/2012; 7(1). DOI: 10.1001/dmp.2012.54
Source: PubMed


To evaluate key attributes, strengths, and limitations of the American Red Cross (ARC) disaster-related mortality surveillance system implemented during Hurricane Ike in Texas 2008, and to provide recommendations for system improvement.

We evaluated key attributes of the ARC mortality surveillance system. Evaluation included interviews with stakeholders and linking ARC data with the Texas Department of State Health Services’ (DSHS) system for comparison.

During September 11 through October 6, 2008, the ARC identified 38 deaths, whereas DSHS identified 74 deaths related to Hurricane Ike (sensitivity = 47%; positive predictive value = 92%). The ARC had complete data on 61% to 92% of deaths, and an 83% to 97% concordance was observed between the 2 systems for key variables.

The ARC surveillance system is simple, flexible, and stable. We recommend establishing written guidelines to improve data quality and representativeness. As an important supporting agency in disaster situations and the sole source of data regarding disaster-related mortality in multiple states, improvement of the ARC system will benefit stakeholders and promote dissemination of useful information for preventing future deaths.

1 Follower
20 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We briefly describe 2 systems that provided disaster-related mortality surveillance during and after Hurricane Sandy in New York City, namely, the New York City Health Department Electronic Death Registration System (EDRS) and the American Red Cross paper-based tracking system. Red Cross fatality data were linked with New York City EDRS records by using decedent name and date of birth. We analyzed cases identified by both systems for completeness and agreement across selected variables and the time interval between death and reporting in the system. Red Cross captured 93% (41/44) of all Sandy-related deaths; the completeness and quality varied by item, and timeliness was difficult to determine. The circumstances leading to death captured by Red Cross were particularly useful for identifying reasons individuals stayed in evacuation zones. EDRS variables were nearly 100% complete, and the median interval between date of death and reporting was 6 days (range: 0-43 days). Our findings indicate that a number of steps have the potential to improve disaster-related mortality surveillance, including updating Red Cross surveillance forms and electronic databases to enhance timeliness assessments, greater collaboration across agencies to share and use data for public health preparedness, and continued expansion of electronic death registration systems. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2014;8:489-491).
    No preview · Article · Dec 2014 · Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study aimed to identify the indices and frameworks that have been used to assess the performance of communicable disease surveillance (CDS) in response to disasters and other emergencies, including infectious disease outbreaks. In this systematic review, PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, ScienceDirect, ProQuest databases and grey literature were searched until the end of 2013. All retrieved titles were examined in accordance with inclusion criteria. Abstracts of the relevant titles were reviewed and eligible abstracts were included in a list for data abstraction. Finally, the study variables were extracted. Sixteen articles and one book were found relevant to our study objectives. In these articles, 31 criteria and 35 indicators were used or suggested for the assessment/evaluation of the performance of surveillance systems in disasters. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) updated guidelines for the evaluation of public health surveillance systems were the most widely used. Despite the importance of performance assessment in improving CDS in response to disasters, there is a lack of clear and accepted frameworks. There is also no agreement on the use of existing criteria and indices. The only relevant framework is the CDC guideline, which is a common framework for assessing public health surveillance systems as a whole. There is an urgent need to develop appropriate frameworks, criteria, and indices for specifically assessing the performance of CDS in response to disasters and other emergencies, including infectious diseases outbreaks. Key words: Disasters, Emergencies, Communicable Diseases, Surveillance System, Performance Assessment.
    Preview · Article · Feb 2015 · PLoS Currents
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Following the twin earthquakes on August 11, 2012, in the East Azerbaijan province of Iran, the provincial health center set up a surveillance system to monitor communicable diseases. This study aimed to assess the performance of this surveillance system. In this quantitative-qualitative study, performance of the communicable diseases surveillance system was assessed by using the updated guidelines of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Qualitative data were collected through interviews with the surveillance system participants, and quantitative data were obtained from the surveillance system. The surveillance system was useful, simple, representative, timely, and flexible. The data quality, acceptability, and stability of the surveillance system were 65.6%, 10.63%, and 100%, respectively. The sensitivity and positive predictive value were not calculated owing to the absence of a gold standard. The surveillance system satisfactorily met the goals expected for its setup. The data obtained led to the control of communicable diseases in the affected areas. Required interventions based on the incidence of communicable disease were designed and implemented. The results also reassured health authorities and the public. However, data quality and acceptability should be taken into consideration and reviewed for implementation in future disasters. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2015;0:1-7).
    No preview · Article · Apr 2015 · Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness