Cargando…

Point-of-Care Testing as an Influenza Surveillance Tool: Methodology and Lessons Learned from Implementation

Objectives. Disease surveillance combines data collection and analysis with dissemination of findings to decision makers. The timeliness of these activities affects the ability to implement preventive measures. Influenza surveillance has traditionally been hampered by delays in both data collection...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gren, Lisa H., Porucznik, Christina A., Joy, Elizabeth A., Lyon, Joseph L., Staes, Catherine J., Alder, Stephen C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3649292/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23691297
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/242970
_version_ 1782268940153520128
author Gren, Lisa H.
Porucznik, Christina A.
Joy, Elizabeth A.
Lyon, Joseph L.
Staes, Catherine J.
Alder, Stephen C.
author_facet Gren, Lisa H.
Porucznik, Christina A.
Joy, Elizabeth A.
Lyon, Joseph L.
Staes, Catherine J.
Alder, Stephen C.
author_sort Gren, Lisa H.
collection PubMed
description Objectives. Disease surveillance combines data collection and analysis with dissemination of findings to decision makers. The timeliness of these activities affects the ability to implement preventive measures. Influenza surveillance has traditionally been hampered by delays in both data collection and dissemination. Methods. We used statistical process control (SPC) to evaluate the daily percentage of outpatient visits with a positive point-of-care (POC) influenza test in the University of Utah Primary Care Research Network. Results. Retrospectively, POC testing generated an alert in each of 4 seasons (2004–2008, median 16 days before epidemic onset), suggesting that email notification of clinicians would be 9 days earlier than surveillance alerts posted to the Utah Department of Health website. In the 2008-09 season, the algorithm generated a real-time alert 19 days before epidemic onset. Clinicians in 4 intervention clinics received email notification of the alert within 4 days. Compared with clinicians in 6 control clinics, intervention clinicians were 40% more likely to perform rapid testing (P = 0.105) and twice as likely to vaccinate for seasonal influenza (P = 0.104) after notification. Conclusions. Email notification of SPC-generated alerts provided significantly earlier notification of the epidemic onset than traditional surveillance. Clinician preventive behavior was not significantly different in intervention clinics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3649292
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36492922013-05-20 Point-of-Care Testing as an Influenza Surveillance Tool: Methodology and Lessons Learned from Implementation Gren, Lisa H. Porucznik, Christina A. Joy, Elizabeth A. Lyon, Joseph L. Staes, Catherine J. Alder, Stephen C. Influenza Res Treat Research Article Objectives. Disease surveillance combines data collection and analysis with dissemination of findings to decision makers. The timeliness of these activities affects the ability to implement preventive measures. Influenza surveillance has traditionally been hampered by delays in both data collection and dissemination. Methods. We used statistical process control (SPC) to evaluate the daily percentage of outpatient visits with a positive point-of-care (POC) influenza test in the University of Utah Primary Care Research Network. Results. Retrospectively, POC testing generated an alert in each of 4 seasons (2004–2008, median 16 days before epidemic onset), suggesting that email notification of clinicians would be 9 days earlier than surveillance alerts posted to the Utah Department of Health website. In the 2008-09 season, the algorithm generated a real-time alert 19 days before epidemic onset. Clinicians in 4 intervention clinics received email notification of the alert within 4 days. Compared with clinicians in 6 control clinics, intervention clinicians were 40% more likely to perform rapid testing (P = 0.105) and twice as likely to vaccinate for seasonal influenza (P = 0.104) after notification. Conclusions. Email notification of SPC-generated alerts provided significantly earlier notification of the epidemic onset than traditional surveillance. Clinician preventive behavior was not significantly different in intervention clinics. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2013 2013-04-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3649292/ /pubmed/23691297 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/242970 Text en Copyright © 2013 Lisa H. Gren et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Gren, Lisa H.
Porucznik, Christina A.
Joy, Elizabeth A.
Lyon, Joseph L.
Staes, Catherine J.
Alder, Stephen C.
Point-of-Care Testing as an Influenza Surveillance Tool: Methodology and Lessons Learned from Implementation
title Point-of-Care Testing as an Influenza Surveillance Tool: Methodology and Lessons Learned from Implementation
title_full Point-of-Care Testing as an Influenza Surveillance Tool: Methodology and Lessons Learned from Implementation
title_fullStr Point-of-Care Testing as an Influenza Surveillance Tool: Methodology and Lessons Learned from Implementation
title_full_unstemmed Point-of-Care Testing as an Influenza Surveillance Tool: Methodology and Lessons Learned from Implementation
title_short Point-of-Care Testing as an Influenza Surveillance Tool: Methodology and Lessons Learned from Implementation
title_sort point-of-care testing as an influenza surveillance tool: methodology and lessons learned from implementation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3649292/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23691297
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/242970
work_keys_str_mv AT grenlisah pointofcaretestingasaninfluenzasurveillancetoolmethodologyandlessonslearnedfromimplementation
AT porucznikchristinaa pointofcaretestingasaninfluenzasurveillancetoolmethodologyandlessonslearnedfromimplementation
AT joyelizabetha pointofcaretestingasaninfluenzasurveillancetoolmethodologyandlessonslearnedfromimplementation
AT lyonjosephl pointofcaretestingasaninfluenzasurveillancetoolmethodologyandlessonslearnedfromimplementation
AT staescatherinej pointofcaretestingasaninfluenzasurveillancetoolmethodologyandlessonslearnedfromimplementation
AT alderstephenc pointofcaretestingasaninfluenzasurveillancetoolmethodologyandlessonslearnedfromimplementation