Cargando…

Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review

INTRODUCTION: Timely notification of infectious diseases is crucial for prompt response by public health services. Adequate notification systems facilitate timely notification. A systematic literature review was performed to assess outcomes of studies on notification timeliness and to determine whic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Swaan, Corien, van den Broek, Anouk, Kretzschmar, Mirjam, Richardus, Jan Hendrik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6002046/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29902216
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198845
_version_ 1783332130786377728
author Swaan, Corien
van den Broek, Anouk
Kretzschmar, Mirjam
Richardus, Jan Hendrik
author_facet Swaan, Corien
van den Broek, Anouk
Kretzschmar, Mirjam
Richardus, Jan Hendrik
author_sort Swaan, Corien
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Timely notification of infectious diseases is crucial for prompt response by public health services. Adequate notification systems facilitate timely notification. A systematic literature review was performed to assess outcomes of studies on notification timeliness and to determine which aspects of notification systems are associated with timely notification. METHODOLOGY: Articles reviewing timeliness of notifications published between 2000 and 2017 were searched in Pubmed and Scopus. Using a standardized notification chain, timeliness of reporting system for each article was defined as either sufficient (≥ 80% notifications in time), partly sufficient (≥ 50–80%), or insufficient (< 50%) according to the article’s predefined timeframe, a standardized timeframe for all articles, and a disease specific timeframe. Electronic notification systems were compared with conventional methods (postal mail, fax, telephone, email) and mobile phone reporting. RESULTS: 48 articles were identified. In almost one third of the studies with a predefined timeframe (39), timeliness of notification systems was either sufficient or insufficient (11/39, 28% and 12/39, 31% resp.). Applying the standardized timeframe (45 studies) revealed similar outcomes (13/45, 29%, sufficient notification timeframe, vs 15/45, 33%, insufficient). The disease specific timeframe was not met by any study. Systems involving reporting by laboratories most often complied sufficiently with predefined or standardized timeframes. Outcomes were not related to electronic, conventional notification systems or mobile phone reporting. Electronic systems were faster in comparative studies (10/13); this hardly resulted in sufficient timeliness, neither according to predefined nor to standardized timeframes. CONCLUSION: A minority of notification systems meets either predefined, standardized or disease specific timeframes. Systems including laboratory reporting are associated with timely notification. Electronic systems reduce reporting delay, but implementation needs considerable effort to comply with notification timeframes. During outbreak threats, patient, doctors and laboratory testing delays need to be reduced to achieve timely detection and notification. Public health authorities should incorporate procedures for this in their preparedness plans.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6002046
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60020462018-06-25 Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review Swaan, Corien van den Broek, Anouk Kretzschmar, Mirjam Richardus, Jan Hendrik PLoS One Research Article INTRODUCTION: Timely notification of infectious diseases is crucial for prompt response by public health services. Adequate notification systems facilitate timely notification. A systematic literature review was performed to assess outcomes of studies on notification timeliness and to determine which aspects of notification systems are associated with timely notification. METHODOLOGY: Articles reviewing timeliness of notifications published between 2000 and 2017 were searched in Pubmed and Scopus. Using a standardized notification chain, timeliness of reporting system for each article was defined as either sufficient (≥ 80% notifications in time), partly sufficient (≥ 50–80%), or insufficient (< 50%) according to the article’s predefined timeframe, a standardized timeframe for all articles, and a disease specific timeframe. Electronic notification systems were compared with conventional methods (postal mail, fax, telephone, email) and mobile phone reporting. RESULTS: 48 articles were identified. In almost one third of the studies with a predefined timeframe (39), timeliness of notification systems was either sufficient or insufficient (11/39, 28% and 12/39, 31% resp.). Applying the standardized timeframe (45 studies) revealed similar outcomes (13/45, 29%, sufficient notification timeframe, vs 15/45, 33%, insufficient). The disease specific timeframe was not met by any study. Systems involving reporting by laboratories most often complied sufficiently with predefined or standardized timeframes. Outcomes were not related to electronic, conventional notification systems or mobile phone reporting. Electronic systems were faster in comparative studies (10/13); this hardly resulted in sufficient timeliness, neither according to predefined nor to standardized timeframes. CONCLUSION: A minority of notification systems meets either predefined, standardized or disease specific timeframes. Systems including laboratory reporting are associated with timely notification. Electronic systems reduce reporting delay, but implementation needs considerable effort to comply with notification timeframes. During outbreak threats, patient, doctors and laboratory testing delays need to be reduced to achieve timely detection and notification. Public health authorities should incorporate procedures for this in their preparedness plans. Public Library of Science 2018-06-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6002046/ /pubmed/29902216 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198845 Text en © 2018 Swaan 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Swaan, Corien
van den Broek, Anouk
Kretzschmar, Mirjam
Richardus, Jan Hendrik
Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review
title Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review
title_full Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review
title_fullStr Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review
title_full_unstemmed Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review
title_short Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review
title_sort timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: a systematic literature review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6002046/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29902216
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198845
work_keys_str_mv AT swaancorien timelinessofnotificationsystemsforinfectiousdiseasesasystematicliteraturereview
AT vandenbroekanouk timelinessofnotificationsystemsforinfectiousdiseasesasystematicliteraturereview
AT kretzschmarmirjam timelinessofnotificationsystemsforinfectiousdiseasesasystematicliteraturereview
AT richardusjanhendrik timelinessofnotificationsystemsforinfectiousdiseasesasystematicliteraturereview