How complete and accurate is meningococcal disease notification?

E Breen, S Ghebrehewet, M Regan, A P J Thomson
{"title":"How complete and accurate is meningococcal disease notification?","authors":"E Breen,&nbsp;S Ghebrehewet,&nbsp;M Regan,&nbsp;A P J Thomson","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Effective public health control of meningococcal disease (meningococcal meningitis and septicaemia) is dependent on complete, accurate and speedy notification. Using capture-recapture techniques this study assesses the completeness, accuracy and timeliness of meningococcal notification in a health authority. The completeness of meningococcal disease notification was 94.8% (95% confidence interval 93.2% to 96.2%); 91.2% of cases in 2001 were notified within 24 hours of diagnosis, but 28.0% of notifications in 2001 were false positives. Clinical staff need to be aware of the public health implications of a notification of meningococcal disease, and of failure of, or delay in notification. Incomplete or delayed notification not only leads to inaccurate data collection but also means that important public health measures may not be taken. A clinical diagnosis of meningococcal disease should be carefully considered between the clinician and the consultant in communicable disease control (CCDC). Otherwise, prophylaxis may be given unnecessarily, disease incidence inflated, and the benefits of control measures underestimated. Consultants in communicable disease control (CCDCs), in conjunction with clinical staff, should de-notify meningococcal disease if the diagnosis changes.</p>","PeriodicalId":72640,"journal":{"name":"Communicable disease and public health","volume":"7 4","pages":"334-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communicable disease and public health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Effective public health control of meningococcal disease (meningococcal meningitis and septicaemia) is dependent on complete, accurate and speedy notification. Using capture-recapture techniques this study assesses the completeness, accuracy and timeliness of meningococcal notification in a health authority. The completeness of meningococcal disease notification was 94.8% (95% confidence interval 93.2% to 96.2%); 91.2% of cases in 2001 were notified within 24 hours of diagnosis, but 28.0% of notifications in 2001 were false positives. Clinical staff need to be aware of the public health implications of a notification of meningococcal disease, and of failure of, or delay in notification. Incomplete or delayed notification not only leads to inaccurate data collection but also means that important public health measures may not be taken. A clinical diagnosis of meningococcal disease should be carefully considered between the clinician and the consultant in communicable disease control (CCDC). Otherwise, prophylaxis may be given unnecessarily, disease incidence inflated, and the benefits of control measures underestimated. Consultants in communicable disease control (CCDCs), in conjunction with clinical staff, should de-notify meningococcal disease if the diagnosis changes.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
脑膜炎球菌病通报的完整性和准确性如何?
对脑膜炎球菌病(脑膜炎球菌性脑膜炎和败血症)的有效公共卫生控制取决于完整、准确和迅速的通报。使用捕获-再捕获技术,本研究评估了卫生当局脑膜炎球菌通报的完整性、准确性和及时性。脑膜炎球菌病通报的完整性为94.8%(95%可信区间93.2% ~ 96.2%);2001年91.2%的病例在诊断后24小时内得到通报,但2001年28.0%的通报是假阳性。临床工作人员需要了解通报脑膜炎球菌病对公共卫生的影响,以及通报失败或延误的影响。通报不完整或延迟不仅会导致数据收集不准确,而且还意味着可能无法采取重要的公共卫生措施。脑膜炎球菌病的临床诊断应在临床医生和传染病控制(CCDC)会诊医生之间仔细考虑。否则,可能会进行不必要的预防,夸大疾病发病率,低估控制措施的益处。如果诊断发生变化,传染病控制(CCDCs)顾问应与临床工作人员一起取消通报脑膜炎球菌病。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
What should we measure: infection or infection control? Accountability for health protection in England: how this has been affected by the establishment of the Health Protection Agency. Evaluation of peer review of infection control arrangements for healthcare-associated infection in four acute care trusts in the East of England. Surveillance of antenatal infections--HIV, hepatitis B, syphilis and rubella susceptibility in London. How complete and accurate is meningococcal disease notification?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1