Cargando…

Did Advances in Global Surveillance and Notification Systems Make a Difference in the 2009 H1N1 Pandemic?–A Retrospective Analysis

BACKGROUND: The 2009 H1N1 outbreak provides an opportunity to identify strengths and weaknesses of disease surveillance and notification systems that have been implemented in the past decade. METHODS: Drawing on a systematic review of the scientific literature, official documents, websites, and news...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Ying, Lopez-Gatell, Hugo, Alpuche-Aranda, Celia M., Stoto, Michael A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3616047/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23573217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0059893
_version_ 1782265090871918592
author Zhang, Ying
Lopez-Gatell, Hugo
Alpuche-Aranda, Celia M.
Stoto, Michael A.
author_facet Zhang, Ying
Lopez-Gatell, Hugo
Alpuche-Aranda, Celia M.
Stoto, Michael A.
author_sort Zhang, Ying
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The 2009 H1N1 outbreak provides an opportunity to identify strengths and weaknesses of disease surveillance and notification systems that have been implemented in the past decade. METHODS: Drawing on a systematic review of the scientific literature, official documents, websites, and news reports, we constructed a timeline differentiating three kinds of events: (1) the emergence and spread of the pH1N1 virus, (2) local health officials’ awareness and understanding of the outbreak, and (3) notifications about the events and their implications. We then conducted a “critical event” analysis of the surveillance process to ascertain when health officials became aware of the epidemiologic facts of the unfolding pandemic and whether advances in surveillance notification systems hastened detection. RESULTS: This analysis revealed three critical events. First, medical personnel identified pH1N1in California children because of an experimental surveillance program, leading to a novel viral strain being identified by CDC. Second, Mexican officials recognized that unconnected outbreaks represented a single phenomenon. Finally, the identification of a pH1N1 outbreak in a New York City high school was hastened by awareness of the emerging pandemic. Analysis of the timeline suggests that at best the global response could have been about one week earlier (which would not have stopped spread to other countries), and could have been much later. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis shows that investments in global surveillance and notification systems made an important difference in the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. In particular, enhanced laboratory capacity in the U.S. and Canada led to earlier detection and characterization of the 2009 H1N1. This includes enhanced capacity at the federal, state, and local levels in the U.S., as well as a trilateral agreement enabling collaboration among U.S., Canada, and Mexico. In addition, improved global notification systems contributed by helping health officials understand the relevance and importance of their own information.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3616047
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36160472013-04-09 Did Advances in Global Surveillance and Notification Systems Make a Difference in the 2009 H1N1 Pandemic?–A Retrospective Analysis Zhang, Ying Lopez-Gatell, Hugo Alpuche-Aranda, Celia M. Stoto, Michael A. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: The 2009 H1N1 outbreak provides an opportunity to identify strengths and weaknesses of disease surveillance and notification systems that have been implemented in the past decade. METHODS: Drawing on a systematic review of the scientific literature, official documents, websites, and news reports, we constructed a timeline differentiating three kinds of events: (1) the emergence and spread of the pH1N1 virus, (2) local health officials’ awareness and understanding of the outbreak, and (3) notifications about the events and their implications. We then conducted a “critical event” analysis of the surveillance process to ascertain when health officials became aware of the epidemiologic facts of the unfolding pandemic and whether advances in surveillance notification systems hastened detection. RESULTS: This analysis revealed three critical events. First, medical personnel identified pH1N1in California children because of an experimental surveillance program, leading to a novel viral strain being identified by CDC. Second, Mexican officials recognized that unconnected outbreaks represented a single phenomenon. Finally, the identification of a pH1N1 outbreak in a New York City high school was hastened by awareness of the emerging pandemic. Analysis of the timeline suggests that at best the global response could have been about one week earlier (which would not have stopped spread to other countries), and could have been much later. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis shows that investments in global surveillance and notification systems made an important difference in the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. In particular, enhanced laboratory capacity in the U.S. and Canada led to earlier detection and characterization of the 2009 H1N1. This includes enhanced capacity at the federal, state, and local levels in the U.S., as well as a trilateral agreement enabling collaboration among U.S., Canada, and Mexico. In addition, improved global notification systems contributed by helping health officials understand the relevance and importance of their own information. Public Library of Science 2013-04-03 /pmc/articles/PMC3616047/ /pubmed/23573217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0059893 Text en © 2013 Zhang et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Zhang, Ying
Lopez-Gatell, Hugo
Alpuche-Aranda, Celia M.
Stoto, Michael A.
Did Advances in Global Surveillance and Notification Systems Make a Difference in the 2009 H1N1 Pandemic?–A Retrospective Analysis
title Did Advances in Global Surveillance and Notification Systems Make a Difference in the 2009 H1N1 Pandemic?–A Retrospective Analysis
title_full Did Advances in Global Surveillance and Notification Systems Make a Difference in the 2009 H1N1 Pandemic?–A Retrospective Analysis
title_fullStr Did Advances in Global Surveillance and Notification Systems Make a Difference in the 2009 H1N1 Pandemic?–A Retrospective Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Did Advances in Global Surveillance and Notification Systems Make a Difference in the 2009 H1N1 Pandemic?–A Retrospective Analysis
title_short Did Advances in Global Surveillance and Notification Systems Make a Difference in the 2009 H1N1 Pandemic?–A Retrospective Analysis
title_sort did advances in global surveillance and notification systems make a difference in the 2009 h1n1 pandemic?–a retrospective analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3616047/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23573217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0059893
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangying didadvancesinglobalsurveillanceandnotificationsystemsmakeadifferenceinthe2009h1n1pandemicaretrospectiveanalysis
AT lopezgatellhugo didadvancesinglobalsurveillanceandnotificationsystemsmakeadifferenceinthe2009h1n1pandemicaretrospectiveanalysis
AT alpuchearandaceliam didadvancesinglobalsurveillanceandnotificationsystemsmakeadifferenceinthe2009h1n1pandemicaretrospectiveanalysis
AT stotomichaela didadvancesinglobalsurveillanceandnotificationsystemsmakeadifferenceinthe2009h1n1pandemicaretrospectiveanalysis