Timeliness of Infectious Disease Reporting in the Netherlands
Author Information
Author(s): Reijn Elisabeth, Swaan Corien M, Kretzschmar Mirjam EE, van Steenbergen Jim E
Primary Institution: Municipal Health Service (MHS) Zaanstreek-Waterland
Hypothesis
Does the timeliness of reporting infectious diseases improve with direct laboratory reporting agreements?
Conclusion
Many cases of the six notifiable diseases were not reported within two incubation periods, and many were reported more than three days after laboratory diagnosis.
Supporting Evidence
- 0.4% of shigellosis cases were reported within one incubation period.
- 90.3% of HAV infection cases were reported within one incubation period.
- 97.1% of shigellosis cases were not reported within two incubation periods.
- 42% of shigellosis cases were reported more than three days after laboratory diagnosis.
- MHS with agreements showed significantly shorter notification times.
Takeaway
Doctors need to tell health services about sick people faster so that everyone can stay safe from diseases. Using faster ways to report can help a lot.
Methodology
The study analyzed reporting data from June 2003 to December 2008 for six infectious diseases, calculating median intervals between symptom onset and notification, and between laboratory diagnosis and notification.
Potential Biases
Potential bias due to missing or incorrect data in reports.
Limitations
Some Municipal Health Services merged during the study, causing data loss, and not all laboratories had physician agreements.
Participant Demographics
Reports were collected from 31 Municipal Health Services across the Netherlands.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.01
Confidence Interval
95% CI 1.7-8.9 days
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website