Erika Samoff1, Lauren Dibiase, Mary T Fangman, Aaron T Fleischauer, Anna E Waller, Pia D M MacDonald. 1. Erika Samoff, Lauren DiBiase, Mary T. Fangman, and Pia D. M. MacDonald are with the Institute for Public Health, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Aaron T. Fleischauer is with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and North Carolina Division of Public Health, Raleigh. Anna E. Waller is with the Carolina Center for Health Informatics, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We assessed the timeliness, accuracy, and cost of a new electronic disease surveillance system at the local health department level. We describe practices associated with lower cost and better surveillance timeliness and accuracy. METHODS: Interviews conducted May through August 2010 with local health department (LHD) staff at a simple random sample of 30 of 100 North Carolina counties provided information on surveillance practices and costs; we used surveillance system data to calculate timeliness and accuracy. We identified LHDs with best timeliness and accuracy and used these categories to compare surveillance practices and costs. RESULTS: Local health departments in the top tertiles for surveillance timeliness and accuracy had a lower cost per case reported than LHDs with lower timeliness and accuracy ($71 and $124 per case reported, respectively; P = .03). Best surveillance practices fell into 2 domains: efficient use of the electronic surveillance system and use of surveillance data for local evaluation and program management. CONCLUSIONS: Timely and accurate surveillance can be achieved in the setting of restricted funding experienced by many LHDs. Adopting best surveillance practices may improve both efficiency and public health outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: We assessed the timeliness, accuracy, and cost of a new electronic disease surveillance system at the local health department level. We describe practices associated with lower cost and better surveillance timeliness and accuracy. METHODS: Interviews conducted May through August 2010 with local health department (LHD) staff at a simple random sample of 30 of 100 North Carolina counties provided information on surveillance practices and costs; we used surveillance system data to calculate timeliness and accuracy. We identified LHDs with best timeliness and accuracy and used these categories to compare surveillance practices and costs. RESULTS: Local health departments in the top tertiles for surveillance timeliness and accuracy had a lower cost per case reported than LHDs with lower timeliness and accuracy ($71 and $124 per case reported, respectively; P = .03). Best surveillance practices fell into 2 domains: efficient use of the electronic surveillance system and use of surveillance data for local evaluation and program management. CONCLUSIONS: Timely and accurate surveillance can be achieved in the setting of restricted funding experienced by many LHDs. Adopting best surveillance practices may improve both efficiency and public health outcomes.
Authors: Paul Campbell Erwin; Sandra B Greene; Glen P Mays; Thomas C Ricketts; Mary V Davis Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2010-06-17 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Matthew L Boulton; James Hadler; Angela J Beck; Lisa Ferland; Maureen Lichtveld Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2011 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Christopher B Hurt; Arianne S Morrison; Jalila Guy; Victoria L Mobley; Ann M Dennis; Clare Barrington; Erika Samoff; Lisa B Hightow-Weidman; Candice J McNeil; Monique G Carry; Matthew Hogben; Arlene C Seña Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Bala Hota; Paul Casey; Anne F McIntyre; Jawad Khan; Shafiq Rab; Aneesh Chopra; Omar Lateef; Jennifer E Layden Journal: JMIR Public Health Surveill Date: 2022-09-27