Completeness and timeliness of <it>Salmonella </it>notifications in Ireland in 2008: a cross sectional study
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In Ireland, salmonellosis is the second most common cause of bacterial gastroenteritis. A new electronic system for reporting (Computerised Infectious Disease Reporting - CIDR) of <it>Salmonella </it>cases was established...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book |
| Published: |
BMC,
2010-09-01T00:00:00Z.
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Connect to this object online. |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In Ireland, salmonellosis is the second most common cause of bacterial gastroenteritis. A new electronic system for reporting (Computerised Infectious Disease Reporting - CIDR) of <it>Salmonella </it>cases was established in 2004. It collates clinical (and/or laboratory) data on confirmed and probable <it>Salmonella </it>cases. The authors studied the completeness and the timeliness of <it>Salmonella </it>notifications in 2008.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This analysis was based upon laboratory confirmed cases of salmonella gastroenteritis. Using data contained in CIDR, we examined completeness for certain non-mandatory fields (country of infection, date of onset of illness, organism, outcome, patient type, and ethnicity). We matched the CIDR data with the dataset provided by the national <it>Salmonella </it>reference laboratory (NSRL) to which all <it>Salmonella </it>spp. isolates are referred for definitive typing. We calculated the main median time intervals in the flow of events of the notification process.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In total, 416 laboratory confirmed <it>Salmonella </it>cases were captured by the national surveillance system and the NSRL and were included in the analysis. Completeness of non mandatory fields varied considerably. Organism was the most complete field (98.8%), ethnicity the least (11%). The median time interval between sample collection (first contact of the patient with the healthcare professional) to the first notification to the regional Department of Public Health (either a clinical or a laboratory notification) was 6 days (Interquartile 4-7 days). The median total identification time interval, time between sample collections to availability of serotyping and phage-typing results on the system was 25 days (Interquartile 19-32 days). Timeliness varied with respect to <it>Salmonella </it>species. Clinical notifications occurred more rapidly than laboratory notifications.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Further feedback and education should be given to health care professionals to improve completeness of reporting of non-mandatory fields. The efficiency of reporting was similar to that published elsewhere. Delays in the reporting system at present mean that although the system is of value in facilitating comprehensive reporting it is unlikely it can be relied upon for rapid detection of outbreaks at an early stage. Direct person-to-person, communication between clinical and reference laboratories and public health practitioners remains a critical element of the surveillance system for rapid outbreak detection.</p> |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | 10.1186/1471-2458-10-568 1471-2458 |