DOCSLIB.ORG

Water-Borne Diseases

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Water-Borne Diseases Bronx Community Health Dashboard: Communicable Disease Last Updated: 9/24/2019 See last slide for more information about this project. 1 Food- & Water-Borne Diseases Data note: All data are reported by labs and are not a measure of true incidence in the population as not all people seek care or are tested. 2 Overall, salmonella rates have declined in all five boroughs Bronx Brooklyn Manhattan Queens Staten Island 25 Salmonella is a group of bacteria that is one of the most common causes of food poisoning in the U.S. Most infected people develop diarrhea, fever, and abdominal cramps 12 to 72 hours after infection. The illness 20 typically lasts 4 to 7 days, and most people recover without treatment. However, in some people, the diarrhea may be so severe that they need to be hospitalized. 16.0 16.2 15 15.5 13.5 12.6 13.1 12.3 10 10.1 adjusted rate per adjusted 100,000 Salmonella 7.0 - Age 5 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 3 Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2000-2017. Salmonella rates are above average in the Morrisania, Pelham, and Fordham areas of the Bronx compared to New York City overall 101 101 Kingsbridge 103 102 16 15.5 102 Northeast Bronx 14.4 13.9 103 Fordham 105 104 12.8 104 Pelham 106 105 Crotona 107 12 106 Morrisania 10.3 10.1 107 Mott Haven 8.8 8 4 adjusted rate per adjusted 100,000 Salmonella - 0 Age 4 Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2017. Campylobacter rates have increased in all five boroughs and are highest in Manhattan. Bronx Brooklyn Manhattan Queens Staten Island 40 37.0 35 Campylobacter is the leading cause of bacterial diarrheal illness in the U.S. Most cases occur as isolated events, not as part of 30 outbreaks. 27.6 25 23.5 20 16.7 15 15.5 14.8 adjusted Campy 100,000 rate per adjusted Campy - 10.3 10 Age 9.8 7.7 5 7.0 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 5 Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2000-2017. Campylobacter rates are below average in the Bronx and highest in Southwest Brooklyn, Upper Manhattan, Chelsea, and Lower Manhattan 101 101 Kingsbridge 102 102 Northeast Bronx 103 24 22.4 103 Fordham 105 21.5 104 Pelham 104 106 105 Crotona 107 106 Morrisania 20 107 Mott Haven 16.9 16.4 15.9 16 14.3 11.7 12 8 adjusted Campy 100,000 rate per adjusted Campy - 4 Age 0 Kingsbridge Morrisania Fordham Pelham Crotona Mott Haven Northeast (101) (106) (103) (104) (105) (107) Bronx (102) 6 Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2017. Shigella rates have decreased in all five boroughs, but the most in Brooklyn. Bronx Brooklyn Manhattan Queens Staten Island 25 A shigella outbreak outside of NYC spread to 21.1 Brooklyn in 2008. Shigella is a group of bacteria that can cause diarrheal disease. Bloody diarrhea, 20 19.6 stomach cramps, and fever are common symptoms. 15 11.5 10 10.2 adjusted 100,000 per rate adjusted Shigella - 6.7 5.0 Age 5 4.5 4.0 3.5 2.0 0.2 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 7 Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2000-2017. Shigella rates are higher in Mott Haven, Morrisania and Kingsbridge areas of the Bronx as compared to NYC overall 101 101 Kingsbridge 103 102 102 Northeast Bronx 10 9.7 103 Fordham 105 104 104 Pelham 106 105 Crotona 107 106 Morrisania 8 107 Mott Haven 7.1 6.4 6 5.5 5.3 4 2.3 2.2 adjusted 100,000 per rate adjusted Shigella - 2 Age 0 Mott Haven Morrisania Kingsbridge Fordham Crotona Pelham Northeast (107) (106) (101) (103) (105) (104) Bronx (102) 8 Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2017. Giardia rates have decreased in all five boroughs, but the most in Manhattan Bronx Brooklyn Manhattan Queens Staten Island 60 55.4 50 Giardia is a single-celled parasite that can cause diarrheal disease. Abdominal cramps, bloating, nausea, and bouts of watery diarrhea are common symptoms. 40 30 21.3 20 17.5 adjusted 100,000 per rate adjusted Giardia - 13.8 Age 10.1 11.9 10 8.5 7.7 6.6 5.3 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 9 Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2000-2017. Except for Fordham, Giardia rates are below average in the Bronx and highest in all of Manhattan and downtown Brooklyn 101 101 Kingsbridge 102 103 102 Northeast Bronx 103 Fordham 105 104 104 Pelham 106 14 105 Crotona 107 106 Morrisania 11.7 107 Mott Haven 12 10.8 10 9.1 8 7.5 7.3 6.9 5.9 6 4 adjusted 100,000 per rate adjusted Giardia - 2 Age 0 10 Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2017. Cryptosporidiosis (crypto) rates have nearly doubled in the Bronx Bronx Brooklyn Manhattan Queens Staten Island 6 5.2 Crypto is a diarrheal disease caused by microscopic parasites that can reside in the intestines of humans and animals and get 5 transmitted through the fecal-oral route, often through contaminated water. Over 98% of cases go unreported in the U.S. 4.3 4 3 3.1 2 1.9 adjusted Crypto rate per 100,000 per rate Crypto adjusted - 1.3 Age 1.1 1 1.1 1.0 0.3 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 11 Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2000-2017. Data missing for Staten Island for 2008, 2009, and 2012. Crypto rates are above average in Morrisania and Crotona areas of the Bronx as compared to NYC overall 101 101 Kingsbridge 102 102 Northeast Bronx 103 5 103 Fordham 4.5 104 Pelham 105 104 105 Crotona 106 106 Morrisania 107 4 107 Mott Haven 3.1 3 2 1.9 1.6 1.5 adjusted Crypto rate per 100,000 per rate Crypto adjusted - 1 Age 0.0 0.0 0 Morrisania Crotona Fordham Kingsbridge Pelham Mott Haven Northeast (106) (105) (103) (101) (104) (107) Bronx (102) 12 Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2017. Amebiasis rates have decreased in all boroughs except Staten Island, but the most in Manhattan. Bronx Brooklyn Manhattan Queens Staten Island 30 26.6 Amebiasis is an intestinal infection that is caused by the parasite Entamoeba histolytica. In some cases, it invades the colon wall, 25 causing colitis, acute dysentery, or chronic diarrhea. 20 15 10 8.2 adjusted Amebiasis 100,000 per rate Amebiasis adjusted - 6.0 Age 4.9 5 3.8 4.2 3.4 2.8 0.9 1.8 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 13 Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2000-2017. Amebiasis rates are above average in the Crotona area of the Bronx as compared to NYC overall 101 101 Kingsbridge 102 102 Northeast Bronx 103 6 103 Fordham 5.6 104 Pelham 105 104 105 Crotona 106 5 106 Morrisania 107 107 Mott Haven 4.2 4 3.6 3.3 3.1 3 2.3 2 1.0 adjusted Amebiasis 100,000 per rate Amebiasis adjusted - 1 Age 0 Crotona Fordham Morrisania Pelham Kingsbridge Mott Haven Northeast (105) (103) (106) (104) (101) (107) Bronx (102) 14 Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2017. Vector-Borne Diseases Data note: All data are reported by labs and are not a measure of true incidence in the population as not all people seek care or are tested. 15 The Bronx had the highest burden of Zika in 2017 4 Zika is a virus that is mainly spread by mosquitoes. A pregnant 101 3.6 mother can transmit it to her baby during pregnancy or around 103 102 the time of birth. It can spread through sexual contact. 105 3.5 104 106 Orange indicates Bronx 107 community districts 3 NYC Overall 2.5 rate per per 100,000 rate 2.0 2 Zika 1.5 1.3 adjusted - 1 0.8 Age 0.5 0.5 0 Bronx Brooklyn Manhattan Queens Staten Island Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2017 16 Based on CDC/CSTE case definition of non-congenital Zika disease and infection. Data not available prior to 2016. In NYC overall, Zika rates are highest for 25-44 year olds and women 4 3.7 3.1 3 2.9 rate per per 100,000 rate Zika 2 adjusted - Age 1 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 <1 1-4 5-14 15-24 25-44 45-64 65+ Male Female 17 Data source: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Communicable Disease Surveillance Data, 2017.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Small Drinking Water Systems Project
    Strong evidence, stronger public health Small Drinking Water-borne Disease Outbreaks in Water Systems Canadian Small Drinking Water Systems Project Hannah Moffatt, Sylvia Struck Report Highlights Information about Canadian drinking water systems and past water-borne disease outbreaks is incomplete and non-standardized. Standard definitions and coordinated surveillance systems for water-borne disease outbreaks would help inform policy and practice. A relatively high proportion of past water-borne disease outbreaks in Canada are estimated to have occurred in small drinking water systems serving populations of 5,000 people or less. Water-borne disease outbreaks in small drinking water systems are often the result of a combination of water system failures; contributing factors often include a lack of source water protection and inadequate drinking water treatment. Analyses suggest small drinking water systems face challenges associated with infrastructure, technology, and financial constraints. Investments in drinking water systems and operator training have the potential to reduce the burden of water-borne disease in Canada. Executive Summary Generally, Canadians have access to safe and secure drinking water. However, as demonstrated by the events of Walkerton in 2000, the exception can be tragic. Outbreaks of water-borne disease are preventable, yet evidence-informed policy and practice is hampered, in part, by our limited knowledge of drinking water systems that experience outbreaks and the factors that contribute to outbreaks in Canada. There is no national surveillance system for systematic collection of water-borne disease outbreak data. Investigating past water-borne disease outbreaks is a valuable approach to collect information to inform practice and policy. Investigations of water-borne disease outbreaks are challenging because the outbreak events are rare, the pathogenic agents involved may be transmitted via multiple routes (e.g., person to person, food-borne, as well as water-borne), and gastrointestinal illnesses are frequently under-reported.
    [Show full text]
  • Globalization and Infectious Diseases: a Review of the Linkages
    TDR/STR/SEB/ST/04.2 SPECIAL TOPICS NO.3 Globalization and infectious diseases: A review of the linkages Social, Economic and Behavioural (SEB) Research UNICEF/UNDP/World Bank/WHO Special Programme for Research & Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR) The "Special Topics in Social, Economic and Behavioural (SEB) Research" series are peer-reviewed publications commissioned by the TDR Steering Committee for Social, Economic and Behavioural Research. For further information please contact: Dr Johannes Sommerfeld Manager Steering Committee for Social, Economic and Behavioural Research (SEB) UNDP/World Bank/WHO Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR) World Health Organization 20, Avenue Appia CH-1211 Geneva 27 Switzerland E-mail: [email protected] TDR/STR/SEB/ST/04.2 Globalization and infectious diseases: A review of the linkages Lance Saker,1 MSc MRCP Kelley Lee,1 MPA, MA, D.Phil. Barbara Cannito,1 MSc Anna Gilmore,2 MBBS, DTM&H, MSc, MFPHM Diarmid Campbell-Lendrum,1 D.Phil. 1 Centre on Global Change and Health London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK 2 European Centre on Health of Societies in Transition (ECOHOST) London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK TDR/STR/SEB/ST/04.2 Copyright © World Health Organization on behalf of the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases 2004 All rights reserved. The use of content from this health information product for all non-commercial education, training and information purposes is encouraged, including translation, quotation and reproduction, in any medium, but the content must not be changed and full acknowledgement of the source must be clearly stated.
    [Show full text]
  • Principles and Practice of Public Health Surveillance
    r I P82 " ,Ji<liTin' S PB93-101129 1994 I" PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE OF PUBLIC HEALTH SURVEILLANCE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL ATLANTA, GA AUG 92 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Technical Information Service \\ P3S3-1C112S Principles and Practice of Public Health Surveillance Steven M. Teutsch R. Elliott Churchill Editors BLDG 10 S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES CDC Public Health Service Health Lftwy Paiuam »*» Epidemiology Program Office Lane.P.n".. 5600 Fishars Centers for Disease Control 20857 August 1992 Us* of trade naaaa is for identification only and does not constitute endorsement by the Public Health Service or the Centers for Disease Control. Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour oer response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this 5 collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headouarters Services. Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson L ' " *— Dav — '. andto the Officeof Managementand Budget. Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington. DC 20503 PB9 3-10 1129 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED August 1992 Final 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Principles and Practice of Surveillance None 6. AUTHOR(S) Teutsch, Steven M. and CHoif.) 4il-^^o Churchill, R. Elliott, Editors 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER Epidemiology Program Office Centers for Disease Control Mail stop C08 Atlanta, GA 30333 None 9.
    [Show full text]
  • Week 14 Part II Vaccine Preventable Disease Surveillance Welcome To
    Slide 1 Welcome to Week 14 Part II on Vaccine Preventable Disease Week 14 Part II Surveillance. In this part, we will discuss immunization Vaccine Preventable coverage as an indicator for vaccine preventable disease Disease Surveillance surveillance, on a global scale. To accomplish this, we will use the most updated information from the World Health Organization (W.H.O.). ©DJH2013 Slide 2 The following slides were excerpted from a presentation entitled “Progress Towards Global Immunization Goals-2012”. This is a summary presentation of key indicators from the World Health Organization which was last updated in July 2013. This is the most current available information at the time of this lecture. Source: http://www.who.int/immunization_monitoring/data/SlidesGlobalI mmunization.pdf http://www.who.int/immunization_monitorin ©DJH2013 g/data/SlidesGlobalImmunization.pdf Slide 3 This graph shows the % coverage with diphtheria, tetanus, & pertussis (DTP3) vaccine (from 0-100%) on the “y” axis and the year (from 1980-2012) on the “x” axis. The yellow bars represent the global percentages. The different colored lines represent the 6 regions designated by the W.H.O.: African, American, Eastern Mediterranean, European, Southeast Asian, and Western Pacific. In 2012, coverage for this vaccine series on a global scale was 83%. In that same year, the Western ©DJH2013 Pacific and European Regions, followed by the American ©DJH2013 Region, had the highest % coverage for this vaccine. Slide 4 This pie chart divides the 6 regions by the numbers of infants not immunized for diphtheria toxoid, tetanus toxoid and pertussis vaccine (DTP3). In 2012, the total number of infants not immunized for DTP3 was 22.6 million.
    [Show full text]
  • (IDSR) Technical Guidelines
    CONTENTS This booklet introduces all 11 sections of the Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) Technical Guidelines THIRD EDITION World Health Organization Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Regional Office for Africa Center for Global Health WHO Health Emergency Programme Division of Public Health Systems and Workforce Development Brazzaville, Republic of Congo Atlanta, Georgia, USA Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response Technical Guidelines, Booklet One: Introduction Section WHO/AF/WHE/CPI/05, 2019 © WHO Regional Office for Africa 2019 Some rights reserved. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- ShareAlike 3.0 IGO licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc- sa/3.0/igo). Under the terms of this licence, you may copy, redistribute and adapt the work for non-commercial purposes, provided the work is appropriately cited, as indicated below. In any use of this work, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organization, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. If you adapt the work, then you must license your work under the same or equivalent Creative Commons licence. If you create a translation of this work, you should add the following disclaimer along with the suggested citation: “This translation was not created by the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO is not responsible for the content or accuracy of this translation. The original English edition shall be the binding and authentic edition”. Any mediation relating to disputes arising under the licence shall be conducted in accordance with the mediation rules of the World Intellectual Property Organization.
    [Show full text]
  • Cooperation and Tension in Regional and Global Infectious Disease
    UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE PEACEBrIeF34 United States Institute of Peace • www.usip.org • Tel. 202.457.1700 • Fax. 202.429.6063 June 1, 2010 LEONARD S. RUBEN S TEIN Cooperation and Tension in Regional E-mail: [email protected] and Global Infectious Disease Phone: 443.287.8729 Surveillance Summary • Globalization of infectious disease transmission has led to international and regional initiatives to improve surveillance and response. The World Health Organization’s revised International Health Regulations provide a more robust legal framework for outbreak investigations. New regional networks are strengthening collaborative approaches to prevention of pandemics even in parts of the world where political tensions usually run high. • To fulfill the promise of these new mechanisms, the United States should integrate capac- ity development for disease surveillance into its global health strategy, including providing greater investment in laboratories, training and technical assistance for low-income countries. • Effective international cooperation has not extended to creating a system for equitable distri- bution of vaccines, resulting in vast disparities in availability of vaccines between richer and poorer countries. As a result, political tensions between wealthy and low-income countries have increased. Unless inequity is addressed, global health security will not advance. Without resolution, The emergence of novel infectious diseases, including HIV/AIDS, SARS, and influenza A (H5N1), has led states to appreciate that protection of their citizens from pathogens depends in part upon the problem of inequitable “ successful international cooperation on infectious disease surveillance and response. The World distribution of vaccines will Health Organization’s revisions to its International Health Regulations, adopted in 2005 and signed remain a major global health by 194 countries, along with the creation of regional networks, represent major advances in coop- eration on global infectious disease surveillance and response.
    [Show full text]
  • (INCLUDING PANDEMICS) INTO DRR PLANNING Annex
    INTEGRATING BIOLOGICAL HAZARDS (INCLUDING PANDEMICS) INTO DRR PLANNING Annex Team Members Rajib Shaw, Keio University and Resilience Innovation Knowledge Academy (RIKA) Ranit Chatterjee, Resilience Innovation Knowledge Academy (RIKA) Ambika Dabral, Resilience Innovation Knowledge Academy (RIKA) Advisors Emily Chan, Chinese University of Hong Kong, China Antonia Loyzaga, National Resilience Council, the Philippines Yong-kyun Kim, Ministry of Interior and Safety, Republic of Korea ii | Page Table of Contents 1. Background ............................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Biological hazards ..................................................................................................................................... 2 3. Content review ......................................................................................................................................... 5 3.1 Regional DRR and biological hazards/ public health response plans/ agreements ........................ 5 3.1.1 The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) ............................................................. 6 3.1.2 European Union (EU) ............................................................................................................... 7 3.2 National DRR and biological hazards/ public health response plans ............................................ 11 3.2.1 Germany ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Recreational Water and Prevention of Waterborne Disease Transmission
    The Domestic Public Health Impact of Climate Change: U.S. Perspective on Waterborne Disease Transmission Michael J. Beach, Ph. D. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Potential U.S. Health Effects of Climate Change Heat stress, cardiovascular HEAT failure SEVERE WEATHER Injuries, fatalities Asthma, cardiovascular AIR POLLUTION Climate change: disease Respiratory allergies, poison ALLERGIES ivy • Temperature rise Malaria, dengue, VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES encephalitis, hantavirus, Rift • Sea level rise Valley fever • Hydrologic Cryptosporidiosis, Naegleria, WATER-BORNE DISEASES Campylobacteriosis, extremes vibriosis leptospirosis Malnutrition, diarrhea, algal WATER AND FOOD SUPPLY blooms, hygiene-related disease Anxiety, post-traumatic MENTAL HEALTH stress, despair, depression Forced migration, civil Adapted from J. Patz ENVIRONMENTAL REFUGEES conflict Potential Climate Change-related Events Impacting Waterborne Disease • Environmental change/disturbance • Extreme weather events • Flood: CSO, SSOs • Drought: soil/geologic changes • Re-use of water and wastewater • Urbanization • Increased cooling system usage • Exploitation of man-made habitats • Legionella, Mycobacterium Potential Climate Change-related Events Impacting Waterborne Disease • Increasing water temperatures and/or nutrients • Enhanced growth of pathogens • Naegleria, Vibrio, Pseudomonas, HAB • HAB-Related Illness Surveillance System (HABISS) • Environmental data, animal and human illness • All recreational water indicators Increasing recreational activities • Swimming
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Guidelines for Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response in the African Region
    Technical guidelines for integrated disease surveillance and response in the African region July 2001 World Health Organization Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Regional Office for Africa EPO-Division of International Health Division of Communicable Disease Prevention and Control NCID-Division of Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases Harare, Zimbabwe Atlanta, Georgia, USA Antoine Kaboré, MD, MPH World Health Organization Regional Headquarters for the African Region Division of Communicable Disease Prevention and Control Harare, Zimbabwe Bradley A. Perkins, MD Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Infectious Diseases Division of Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases Atlanta, Georgia Sharon McDonnell, MD, MPH Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Epidemiology Program Office Division of International Health Atlanta, Georgia This document was prepared by the WHO Regional Office for Africa (AFRO), Harare, Zimbabwe, in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, USA, and supported by USAID. Integrated Disease Surveillance and Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response workgroup at CDC-Atlanta Response workgroup at WHO/AFRO: Bradley A. Perkins, MD Antoine Kaboré, MD, MPH Sharon McDonnell, MD, MPH Wondimagegnehu Alemu, MD, MPH Kathy Cavallaro, MS Bradford Kay, PhD John D. Leake, MD, MPH Paul S. Lusamba-dikassa, MD, PhD Peter Nsubuga, MD, MPH Mac W. Otten, Jr., MD, MPH Helen Perry, MA Louis H. Ouedraogo, MD, MPH Montse Soriano-Gabarro, MD, MSc Developed by: Mac W. Otten, Jr., MD, MPH, Medical Epidemiologist, African Regional Office (WHO) Helen Perry, MA, Educational Design Specialist, Division of International Health (CDC) Electronic Development by: Nadine Sunderland (M.Ed.) and Francois Rollin (CDC) Cover Design by: Diane Speight (B.A.) The material in this manual is in the public domain.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Health Surveillance: Preparing for the Future Pdf Icon[PDF – 40 Pages]
    PUBLIC HEALTH SURVEILLANCE PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE Newer. Faster. Smarter. Better. 2 3 Table of Contents 5 Introduction STRATEGY: This section provides rationale and context for CDC’s Surveillance Strategy 7 Improving Public Health Surveillance 8 A Stepwise Approach 10 Public Health Surveillance at CDC INITIATIVES: This section summarizes priorities, metrics, and impact 13 Taking the Initiative 14 Pulse Check: Our Progress 15 How Tracking Deaths Protects Health 17 How Counting Disease Cases Prompts Action 19 Lab Reporting at the Speed of Light 21 When Symptoms Send a Signal 23 Connecting Data Helps Combat the Opioid Epidemic INNOVATION: This section highlights progress made through innovation and partnerships 25 Enhancing Surveillance Through Innovation 26 When Informatics Promotes Innovation 27 How Sharing Advances Surveillance 29 How Sharing Data Digitally Benefits Health 31 Better Data Connections 32 How a Forward-Thinking Workforce Drives Progress MOVING AHEAD: This section gives a vision for the future 35 Moving Ahead 36 Preparing for the Future 38 Key Sources and Credits 2 3 There is no human endeavor that is “ outside the realm of public health. — William “Bill” Foege, MD, MPH Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1977–1983 ” 4 5 Introduction Over the course of my career I’ve witnessed the progress, power, and untapped potential of public health. I draw inspiration from the quote by Bill Foege—a hero and former CDC director—who believes that nothing is beyond public health’s sphere of influence. His legendary leadership in the defeat of smallpox proved that public health strategies and resourcefulness could eliminate an infectious disease for the first time.
    [Show full text]
  • Infectious Disease Surveillance Jillian Murray and Adam L Cohen, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
    Infectious Disease Surveillance Jillian Murray and Adam L Cohen, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland Ó 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. World Health Organization retains copyright in the manuscript and provides Elsevier the permission to publish the manuscript as a chapter in this book. Goals of Infectious Disease Surveillance into the population. The Zika outbreak in South America in 2015–16 demonstrates how rapidly a known pathogen in Infectious disease surveillance is an important epidemiolog- a naïve population can spread. ical tool to monitor the health of a population. The goals of infectious disease surveillance are threefold: (1) to describe Infectious Disease Surveillance Methods the current burden and epidemiology of disease, (2) to monitor trends, and (3) to identify outbreaks and new path- Infectious disease surveillance can have different approaches ogens. First, describing the burden and epidemiology based on the epidemiology and clinical presentation of the (including seasonality, age distribution, age groups, etc.) of disease and the goals of surveillance. We will discuss some disease is critical for demonstrating the need and advocating distinctions between infectious disease surveillance methods for interventions, such as vaccination and mass drug adminis- and give examples below. tration. Surveillance is also used to detect antimicrobial resis- tance in certain pathogens (for example, fluoroquinolone Active versus Passive Surveillance resistance in gonorrhea) and the circulating strains of disease, which helps target vaccine interventions (for example, annual In passive surveillance systems, medical professionals in the influenza vaccine composition). community and at health facilities report cases to the public Second, infectious disease surveillance is used to monitor health agency, which conducts data management and analysis disease trends, such as the impact of interventions like vacci- once the data are received.
    [Show full text]
  • INTEGRATING BIOLOGICAL HAZARDS (INCLUDING PANDEMICS) INTO DRR PLANNING Technical Advisory Document
    INTEGRATING BIOLOGICAL HAZARDS (INCLUDING PANDEMICS) INTO DRR PLANNING Technical Advisory Document Team Members Rajib Shaw, Keio University and Resilience Innovation Knowledge Academy (RIKA) Ranit Chatterjee, Resilience Innovation Knowledge Academy (RIKA) Ambika Dabral, Resilience Innovation Knowledge Academy (RIKA) Advisors Emily Chan, Chinese University of Hong Kong, China Antonia Loyzaga, National Resilience Council, the Philippines Yong-kyun Kim, Ministry of Interior and Safety, Republic of Korea ii | Page Table of Contents 1. Background .............................................................................................................................................. 1 2. Purpose and target audience .................................................................................................................. 1 3. Review of existing risk assessment frameworks and country experiences ............................................ 2 4. Key sectors relevant for mitigation, transmission and impacts ............................................................. 3 4.1 Sectors that help in mitigation ........................................................................................................ 3 4.2 Sectors that exacerbate transmission of infectious diseases ......................................................... 4 4.3 Sectors impacted ............................................................................................................................. 5 4.3.1 Impact on the primary sector .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]