Macarena C Garcia1, Nedra Y Garrett, Vivian Singletary, Sheereen Brown, Tamara Hennessy-Burt, Gillian Haney, Kimberly Link, Jennifer Tripp, William R Mac Kenzie, Paula Yoon. 1. Office of the Director (Dr Garcia and Ms Garrett), US Public Health Services (Dr Mac Kenzie), and Division of Health Informatics and Surveillance (Dr Yoon), Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia; Public Health Informatics Institute, Atlanta, Georgia (Mss Singletary and Brown); Communicable Disease and Emergency Response Branch, Division of Communicable Disease Control, California Department of Public Health, Sacramento, California (Ms Hennessy-Burt); Bureau of Infectious Disease, Integrated Surveillance and Informatics Services, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts (Ms Haney); Division of Community and Environmental Health, Office of Communicable Disease Control, Central District Health Department, Boise, Idaho (Ms Link); and Southwest District Health Department, Caldwell, Idaho (Ms Tripp).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: State and local public health agencies collect and use surveillance data to identify outbreaks, track cases, investigate causes, and implement measures to protect the public's health through various surveillance systems and data exchange practices. PURPOSE: The purpose of this assessment was to better understand current practices at state and local public health agencies for collecting, managing, processing, reporting, and exchanging notifiable disease surveillance information. METHODS: Over an 18-month period (January 2014-June 2015), we evaluated the process of data exchange between surveillance systems, reporting burdens, and challenges within 3 states (California, Idaho, and Massachusetts) that were using 3 different reporting systems. RESULTS: All 3 states use a combination of paper-based and electronic information systems for managing and exchanging data on reportable conditions within the state. The flow of data from local jurisdictions to the state health departments varies considerably. When state and local information systems are not interoperable, manual duplicative data entry and other work-arounds are often required. The results of the assessment show the complexity of disease reporting at the state and local levels and the multiple systems, processes, and resources engaged in preparing, processing, and transmitting data that limit interoperability and decrease efficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Through this structured assessment, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has a better understanding of the complexities for surveillance of using commercial off-the-shelf data systems (California and Massachusetts), and CDC-developed National Electronic Disease Surveillance System Base System. More efficient data exchange and use of data will help facilitate interoperability between National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance Systems.
BACKGROUND: State and local public health agencies collect and use surveillance data to identify outbreaks, track cases, investigate causes, and implement measures to protect the public's health through various surveillance systems and data exchange practices. PURPOSE: The purpose of this assessment was to better understand current practices at state and local public health agencies for collecting, managing, processing, reporting, and exchanging notifiable disease surveillance information. METHODS: Over an 18-month period (January 2014-June 2015), we evaluated the process of data exchange between surveillance systems, reporting burdens, and challenges within 3 states (California, Idaho, and Massachusetts) that were using 3 different reporting systems. RESULTS:All 3 states use a combination of paper-based and electronic information systems for managing and exchanging data on reportable conditions within the state. The flow of data from local jurisdictions to the state health departments varies considerably. When state and local information systems are not interoperable, manual duplicative data entry and other work-arounds are often required. The results of the assessment show the complexity of disease reporting at the state and local levels and the multiple systems, processes, and resources engaged in preparing, processing, and transmitting data that limit interoperability and decrease efficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Through this structured assessment, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has a better understanding of the complexities for surveillance of using commercial off-the-shelf data systems (California and Massachusetts), and CDC-developed National Electronic Disease Surveillance System Base System. More efficient data exchange and use of data will help facilitate interoperability between National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance Systems.
Authors: William R Mac Kenzie; Arthur J Davidson; Andrew Wiesenthal; Jeffrey P Engel; Kathryn Turner; Laura Conn; Scott J Becker; Sharon Moffatt; Samuel L Groseclose; Jim Jellison; John Stinn; Nedra Y Garrett; Lesliann Helmus; Bob Harmon; Chesley L Richards; John R Lumpkin; Michael F Iademarco Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2016-10-13 Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Scott Troppy; Gillian Haney; Noelle Cocoros; Kevin Cranston; Alfred DeMaria Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2014 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Caitlin Conrad; Heather M Bradley; Dita Broz; Swamy Buddha; Erika L Chapman; Romeo R Galang; Daniel Hillman; John Hon; Karen W Hoover; Monita R Patel; Andrea Perez; Philip J Peters; Pam Pontones; Jeremy C Roseberry; Michelle Sandoval; Jessica Shields; Jennifer Walthall; Dorothy Waterhouse; Paul J Weidle; Hsiu Wu; Joan M Duwve Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2015-05-01 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Nakia S Clemmons; Paul A Gastanaduy; Amy Parker Fiebelkorn; Susan B Redd; Gregory S Wallace Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2015-04-17 Impact factor: 17.586