The 130th Annual Meeting of APHA

Abstract #40416

Mare Schumacher¹, Liva Nohre¹, and Sarah Santana, MPH, DrPH(ABD)². (1) Division of Epidemiology and Data Services, Maricopa County Department of Public Health, 1845 E. Roosevelt, Phoenix, AZ 85006, 602-506-3078, mareschumacher@mail.maricopa.gov, (2) Division of Epidemiology and Data Services, Maricopa County Department of Public Health Services, 1825 E. Roosevelt St, Phoenix, AZ 85006

Background: During October/November 2001, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Arizona Department of Health Services, and the Maricopa County Department of Public Health implemented an automated surveillance system in 11 hospitals in Phoenix. Phoenix was chosen because it hosted the World Series and NASCAR events during this period. The purpose of the system was to quickly detect any unusual disease patterns in the event of a bioterrorist attack.

At emergency rooms, staff members filled out a form for each patient indicating syndromes such as upper respiratory infection with fever, sepsis, or non-traumatic shock. Each day, hospital or health department staff entered this information into a CDC website. The CDC and the health departments downloaded data reports daily. Any unusual occurrences were investigated immediately.

Objectives: An evaluation was conducted to a) test the sensitivity and specificity of the system, b) evaluate the process, including data entry issues, hospital staff satisfaction, etc. and c) determine the cost to the public health departments.

Method: Data from hospital emergency room logs and medical records were compared to data collected on the automated system. The authors looked for patients with targeted syndromes who appeared in the hospital data but not in the surveillance data and vice versa. Interviews were conducted among hospital and public health department staff to measure their satisfaction with the system. The cost of public health staff was calculated.

Results: The study is currently in progress. Results and recommendations will be presented at the meetings.

Learning Objectives:

• Participants will a) learn about the automated surveillance system that was implemented for one month in Phoenix, Arizona in 2001, b) receive process, outcome, and cost evaluations of the system, and c) understand recommendations for setting up automated systems in the future.

Keywords: Bioterrorism, Surveillance

Presenting author's disclosure statement:
Organization/institution whose products or services will be discussed: Centers for Disease Control
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.