Jocelyn J Herstein1, Paul D Biddinger2, Colleen S Kraft3, Lisa Saiman4, Shawn G Gibbs5, Aurora B Le1, Philip W Smith5, Angela L Hewlett5, John J Lowe1. 1. 1Department of Environmental,Agricultural & Occupational Health,University of Nebraska Medical Center,Omaha,Nebraska. 2. 2Division of Emergency Preparedness,Department of Emergency Medicine,Massachusetts General Hospital Boston,Massachusetts. 3. 4Division of Infectious Diseases,Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine,Department of Medicine,Emory University,Atlanta,Georgia. 4. 5Department of Pediatrics,Columbia University Medical Center,New York,New York. 5. 7Nebraska Biocontainment Unit,Nebraska Medicine,Omaha,Nebraska.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe current Ebola treatment center (ETC) locations, their capacity to care for Ebola virus disease patients, and infection control infrastructure features. DESIGN: A 19-question survey was distributed electronically in April 2015. Responses were collected via email by June 2015 and analyzed in an electronic spreadsheet. SETTING: The survey was sent to and completed by site representatives of each ETC. PARTICIPANTS: The survey was sent to all 55 ETCs; 47 (85%) responded. RESULTS: Of the 47 responding ETCs, there are 84 isolation beds available for adults and 91 for children; of these pediatric beds, 35 (38%) are in children's hospitals. In total, the simultaneous capacity of the 47 reporting ETCs is 121 beds. On the basis of the current US census, there are 0.38 beds per million population. Most ETCs have negative pressure isolation rooms, anterooms, and a process for category A waste sterilization, although only 11 facilities (23%) have the capability to sterilize infectious waste on site. CONCLUSIONS: Facilities developed ETCs on the basis of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance, but specific capabilities are not mandated at this present time. Owing to the complex and costly nature of Ebola virus disease treatment and variability in capabilities from facility to facility, in conjunction with the lack of regulations, nationwide capacity in specialized facilities is limited. Further assessments should determine whether ETCs can adapt to safely manage other highly infectious disease threats.
OBJECTIVE: To describe current Ebola treatment center (ETC) locations, their capacity to care for Ebola virus diseasepatients, and infection control infrastructure features. DESIGN: A 19-question survey was distributed electronically in April 2015. Responses were collected via email by June 2015 and analyzed in an electronic spreadsheet. SETTING: The survey was sent to and completed by site representatives of each ETC. PARTICIPANTS: The survey was sent to all 55 ETCs; 47 (85%) responded. RESULTS: Of the 47 responding ETCs, there are 84 isolation beds available for adults and 91 for children; of these pediatric beds, 35 (38%) are in children's hospitals. In total, the simultaneous capacity of the 47 reporting ETCs is 121 beds. On the basis of the current US census, there are 0.38 beds per million population. Most ETCs have negative pressure isolation rooms, anterooms, and a process for category A waste sterilization, although only 11 facilities (23%) have the capability to sterilize infectious waste on site. CONCLUSIONS: Facilities developed ETCs on the basis of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance, but specific capabilities are not mandated at this present time. Owing to the complex and costly nature of Ebola virus disease treatment and variability in capabilities from facility to facility, in conjunction with the lack of regulations, nationwide capacity in specialized facilities is limited. Further assessments should determine whether ETCs can adapt to safely manage other highly infectious disease threats.
Authors: Jocelyn J Herstein; Peter C Iwen; Katelyn C Jelden; Paul D Biddinger; Shawn G Gibbs; Aurora B Le; Angela L Hewlett; John J Lowe Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2018-01-24 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Nancy E Cornish; Nancy L Anderson; Diego G Arambula; Matthew J Arduino; Andrew Bryan; Nancy C Burton; Bin Chen; Beverly A Dickson; Judith G Giri; Natasha K Griffith; Michael A Pentella; Reynolds M Salerno; Paramjit Sandhu; James W Snyder; Christopher A Tormey; Elizabeth A Wagar; Elizabeth G Weirich; Sheldon Campbell Journal: Clin Microbiol Rev Date: 2021-06-09 Impact factor: 50.129
Authors: Jennifer Therkorn; David Drewry Iii; Thomas Pilholski; Kathryn Shaw-Saliba; Gregory Bova; Lisa L Maragakis; Brian Garibaldi; Lauren Sauer Journal: Indoor Air Date: 2018-10-05 Impact factor: 5.770
Authors: Aurora B Le; Erin G Brooks; Lily A McNulty; James R Gill; Jocelyn J Herstein; Janelle Rios; Scott J Patlovich; Katelyn C Jelden; Kendra K Schmid; John J Lowe; Shawn G Gibbs Journal: Forensic Sci Med Pathol Date: 2018-11-06 Impact factor: 2.007
Authors: Jocelyn J Herstein; Paul D Biddinger; Shawn G Gibbs; Aurora B Le; Katelyn C Jelden; Angela L Hewlett; John J Lowe Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2017-06 Impact factor: 6.883