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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |