Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review
Timely notification of infectious diseases is crucial for prompt response by public health services. Adequate notification systems facilitate timely notification. A systematic literature review was performed to assess outcomes of studies on notification timeliness and to determine which aspects of n...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2018-06, Vol.13 (6), p.e0198845-e0198845 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | e0198845 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | e0198845 |
| container_title | PloS one |
| container_volume | 13 |
| creator | Swaan, Corien van den Broek, Anouk Kretzschmar, Mirjam Richardus, Jan Hendrik |
| description | Timely notification of infectious diseases is crucial for prompt response by public health services. Adequate notification systems facilitate timely notification. A systematic literature review was performed to assess outcomes of studies on notification timeliness and to determine which aspects of notification systems are associated with timely notification.
Articles reviewing timeliness of notifications published between 2000 and 2017 were searched in Pubmed and Scopus. Using a standardized notification chain, timeliness of reporting system for each article was defined as either sufficient (≥ 80% notifications in time), partly sufficient (≥ 50-80%), or insufficient (< 50%) according to the article's predefined timeframe, a standardized timeframe for all articles, and a disease specific timeframe. Electronic notification systems were compared with conventional methods (postal mail, fax, telephone, email) and mobile phone reporting.
48 articles were identified. In almost one third of the studies with a predefined timeframe (39), timeliness of notification systems was either sufficient or insufficient (11/39, 28% and 12/39, 31% resp.). Applying the standardized timeframe (45 studies) revealed similar outcomes (13/45, 29%, sufficient notification timeframe, vs 15/45, 33%, insufficient). The disease specific timeframe was not met by any study. Systems involving reporting by laboratories most often complied sufficiently with predefined or standardized timeframes. Outcomes were not related to electronic, conventional notification systems or mobile phone reporting. Electronic systems were faster in comparative studies (10/13); this hardly resulted in sufficient timeliness, neither according to predefined nor to standardized timeframes.
A minority of notification systems meets either predefined, standardized or disease specific timeframes. Systems including laboratory reporting are associated with timely notification. Electronic systems reduce reporting delay, but implementation needs considerable effort to comply with notification timeframes. During outbreak threats, patient, doctors and laboratory testing delays need to be reduced to achieve timely detection and notification. Public health authorities should incorporate procedures for this in their preparedness plans. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0198845 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2055611143</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A543294674</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_b8644309f3984fa2907d47b5a81c3493</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A543294674</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-6badabc5072a8e07c70ef6dbfbf1cba00c6c45f89e1491f219f4a154a963ac463</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk01v1DAQhiMEoqXwDxBEQkJw2MVfcWIOSKuKj5UqVYLCgYvlOONdV0682Emh_x6nm1Yb1APywdb4mXc845kse47REtMSv7v0Q-iUW-58B0uERVWx4kF2jAUlC04QfXhwPsqexHiJUEErzh9nR0QIRAjmx9nPC9uCsx3EmHuTd763xmrVW9_l8Tr20Mbc-JDbzoBO1iHmjY2gIsT3-WpCEq5zZ3sIqh8C5AGuLPx-mj0yykV4Nu0n2fdPHy9OvyzOzj-vT1dnC80F6Re8Vo2qdYFKoipApS4RGN7UpjZY1wohzTUrTCUAM4ENwcIwhQumBKdKM05Pspd73Z3zUU5liZKgouAYY0YTsd4TjVeXchdsq8K19MrKG4MPG6lCysGBrCvOGEXCUFExo4hAZcPKulAV1pSJUevDFG2oW2g0dH1QbiY6v-nsVm78leQIEXTz3DeTQPC_Boi9bG3U4JzqIJV3fDengnKGE_rqH_T-7CZqo1IC6aN8iqtHUbkqGCWC8ZIlankPlVYDrdWph4xN9pnD25lDYnr402_UEKNcf_v6_-z5jzn7-oDdgnL9Nno3jC0X5yDbgzr4GAOYuyJjJMcRuK2GHEdATiOQ3F4cftCd023P07-R7AHp</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2055611143</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>PubMed Central(OpenAccess)</source><source>Public Library of Science</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Swaan, Corien ; van den Broek, Anouk ; Kretzschmar, Mirjam ; Richardus, Jan Hendrik</creator><contributor>Lau, Eric HY</contributor><creatorcontrib>Swaan, Corien ; van den Broek, Anouk ; Kretzschmar, Mirjam ; Richardus, Jan Hendrik ; Lau, Eric HY</creatorcontrib><description>Timely notification of infectious diseases is crucial for prompt response by public health services. Adequate notification systems facilitate timely notification. A systematic literature review was performed to assess outcomes of studies on notification timeliness and to determine which aspects of notification systems are associated with timely notification.
Articles reviewing timeliness of notifications published between 2000 and 2017 were searched in Pubmed and Scopus. Using a standardized notification chain, timeliness of reporting system for each article was defined as either sufficient (≥ 80% notifications in time), partly sufficient (≥ 50-80%), or insufficient (< 50%) according to the article's predefined timeframe, a standardized timeframe for all articles, and a disease specific timeframe. Electronic notification systems were compared with conventional methods (postal mail, fax, telephone, email) and mobile phone reporting.
48 articles were identified. In almost one third of the studies with a predefined timeframe (39), timeliness of notification systems was either sufficient or insufficient (11/39, 28% and 12/39, 31% resp.). Applying the standardized timeframe (45 studies) revealed similar outcomes (13/45, 29%, sufficient notification timeframe, vs 15/45, 33%, insufficient). The disease specific timeframe was not met by any study. Systems involving reporting by laboratories most often complied sufficiently with predefined or standardized timeframes. Outcomes were not related to electronic, conventional notification systems or mobile phone reporting. Electronic systems were faster in comparative studies (10/13); this hardly resulted in sufficient timeliness, neither according to predefined nor to standardized timeframes.
A minority of notification systems meets either predefined, standardized or disease specific timeframes. Systems including laboratory reporting are associated with timely notification. Electronic systems reduce reporting delay, but implementation needs considerable effort to comply with notification timeframes. During outbreak threats, patient, doctors and laboratory testing delays need to be reduced to achieve timely detection and notification. Public health authorities should incorporate procedures for this in their preparedness plans.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0198845</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29902216</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Analysis ; Automation ; Care and treatment ; Case management ; Cell phones ; Communicable Diseases ; Comparative studies ; Disease control ; Disease Notification - methods ; Electronic systems ; Engineering and Technology ; Epidemics ; Facsimile communication ; Health services ; Hepatitis ; Humans ; Infectious diseases ; Laboratories ; Laboratory tests ; Literature reviews ; Medical care ; Medical personnel ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Outbreaks ; People and Places ; Physicians ; Public health ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Researchers ; Services ; Systematic review ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2018-06, Vol.13 (6), p.e0198845-e0198845</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2018 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2018 Swaan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2018 Swaan et al 2018 Swaan et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-6badabc5072a8e07c70ef6dbfbf1cba00c6c45f89e1491f219f4a154a963ac463</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-6badabc5072a8e07c70ef6dbfbf1cba00c6c45f89e1491f219f4a154a963ac463</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1190-3443</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6002046/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6002046/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,724,777,781,861,882,2096,2915,23847,27905,27906,53772,53774,79349,79350</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29902216$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Lau, Eric HY</contributor><creatorcontrib>Swaan, Corien</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van den Broek, Anouk</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kretzschmar, Mirjam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Richardus, Jan Hendrik</creatorcontrib><title>Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Timely notification of infectious diseases is crucial for prompt response by public health services. Adequate notification systems facilitate timely notification. A systematic literature review was performed to assess outcomes of studies on notification timeliness and to determine which aspects of notification systems are associated with timely notification.
Articles reviewing timeliness of notifications published between 2000 and 2017 were searched in Pubmed and Scopus. Using a standardized notification chain, timeliness of reporting system for each article was defined as either sufficient (≥ 80% notifications in time), partly sufficient (≥ 50-80%), or insufficient (< 50%) according to the article's predefined timeframe, a standardized timeframe for all articles, and a disease specific timeframe. Electronic notification systems were compared with conventional methods (postal mail, fax, telephone, email) and mobile phone reporting.
48 articles were identified. In almost one third of the studies with a predefined timeframe (39), timeliness of notification systems was either sufficient or insufficient (11/39, 28% and 12/39, 31% resp.). Applying the standardized timeframe (45 studies) revealed similar outcomes (13/45, 29%, sufficient notification timeframe, vs 15/45, 33%, insufficient). The disease specific timeframe was not met by any study. Systems involving reporting by laboratories most often complied sufficiently with predefined or standardized timeframes. Outcomes were not related to electronic, conventional notification systems or mobile phone reporting. Electronic systems were faster in comparative studies (10/13); this hardly resulted in sufficient timeliness, neither according to predefined nor to standardized timeframes.
A minority of notification systems meets either predefined, standardized or disease specific timeframes. Systems including laboratory reporting are associated with timely notification. Electronic systems reduce reporting delay, but implementation needs considerable effort to comply with notification timeframes. During outbreak threats, patient, doctors and laboratory testing delays need to be reduced to achieve timely detection and notification. Public health authorities should incorporate procedures for this in their preparedness plans.</description><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Automation</subject><subject>Care and treatment</subject><subject>Case management</subject><subject>Cell phones</subject><subject>Communicable Diseases</subject><subject>Comparative studies</subject><subject>Disease control</subject><subject>Disease Notification - methods</subject><subject>Electronic systems</subject><subject>Engineering and Technology</subject><subject>Epidemics</subject><subject>Facsimile communication</subject><subject>Health services</subject><subject>Hepatitis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infectious diseases</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Laboratory tests</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Medical care</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Outbreaks</subject><subject>People and Places</subject><subject>Physicians</subject><subject>Public health</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Researchers</subject><subject>Services</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk01v1DAQhiMEoqXwDxBEQkJw2MVfcWIOSKuKj5UqVYLCgYvlOONdV0682Emh_x6nm1Yb1APywdb4mXc845kse47REtMSv7v0Q-iUW-58B0uERVWx4kF2jAUlC04QfXhwPsqexHiJUEErzh9nR0QIRAjmx9nPC9uCsx3EmHuTd763xmrVW9_l8Tr20Mbc-JDbzoBO1iHmjY2gIsT3-WpCEq5zZ3sIqh8C5AGuLPx-mj0yykV4Nu0n2fdPHy9OvyzOzj-vT1dnC80F6Re8Vo2qdYFKoipApS4RGN7UpjZY1wohzTUrTCUAM4ENwcIwhQumBKdKM05Pspd73Z3zUU5liZKgouAYY0YTsd4TjVeXchdsq8K19MrKG4MPG6lCysGBrCvOGEXCUFExo4hAZcPKulAV1pSJUevDFG2oW2g0dH1QbiY6v-nsVm78leQIEXTz3DeTQPC_Boi9bG3U4JzqIJV3fDengnKGE_rqH_T-7CZqo1IC6aN8iqtHUbkqGCWC8ZIlankPlVYDrdWph4xN9pnD25lDYnr402_UEKNcf_v6_-z5jzn7-oDdgnL9Nno3jC0X5yDbgzr4GAOYuyJjJMcRuK2GHEdATiOQ3F4cftCd023P07-R7AHp</recordid><startdate>20180614</startdate><enddate>20180614</enddate><creator>Swaan, Corien</creator><creator>van den Broek, Anouk</creator><creator>Kretzschmar, Mirjam</creator><creator>Richardus, Jan Hendrik</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1190-3443</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180614</creationdate><title>Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review</title><author>Swaan, Corien ; van den Broek, Anouk ; Kretzschmar, Mirjam ; Richardus, Jan Hendrik</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-6badabc5072a8e07c70ef6dbfbf1cba00c6c45f89e1491f219f4a154a963ac463</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Automation</topic><topic>Care and treatment</topic><topic>Case management</topic><topic>Cell phones</topic><topic>Communicable Diseases</topic><topic>Comparative studies</topic><topic>Disease control</topic><topic>Disease Notification - methods</topic><topic>Electronic systems</topic><topic>Engineering and Technology</topic><topic>Epidemics</topic><topic>Facsimile communication</topic><topic>Health services</topic><topic>Hepatitis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infectious diseases</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Laboratory tests</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Medical care</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Outbreaks</topic><topic>People and Places</topic><topic>Physicians</topic><topic>Public health</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Researchers</topic><topic>Services</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Swaan, Corien</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van den Broek, Anouk</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kretzschmar, Mirjam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Richardus, Jan Hendrik</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database (1962 - current)</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest advanced technologies & aerospace journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials science collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Swaan, Corien</au><au>van den Broek, Anouk</au><au>Kretzschmar, Mirjam</au><au>Richardus, Jan Hendrik</au><au>Lau, Eric HY</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2018-06-14</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>e0198845</spage><epage>e0198845</epage><pages>e0198845-e0198845</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Timely notification of infectious diseases is crucial for prompt response by public health services. Adequate notification systems facilitate timely notification. A systematic literature review was performed to assess outcomes of studies on notification timeliness and to determine which aspects of notification systems are associated with timely notification.
Articles reviewing timeliness of notifications published between 2000 and 2017 were searched in Pubmed and Scopus. Using a standardized notification chain, timeliness of reporting system for each article was defined as either sufficient (≥ 80% notifications in time), partly sufficient (≥ 50-80%), or insufficient (< 50%) according to the article's predefined timeframe, a standardized timeframe for all articles, and a disease specific timeframe. Electronic notification systems were compared with conventional methods (postal mail, fax, telephone, email) and mobile phone reporting.
48 articles were identified. In almost one third of the studies with a predefined timeframe (39), timeliness of notification systems was either sufficient or insufficient (11/39, 28% and 12/39, 31% resp.). Applying the standardized timeframe (45 studies) revealed similar outcomes (13/45, 29%, sufficient notification timeframe, vs 15/45, 33%, insufficient). The disease specific timeframe was not met by any study. Systems involving reporting by laboratories most often complied sufficiently with predefined or standardized timeframes. Outcomes were not related to electronic, conventional notification systems or mobile phone reporting. Electronic systems were faster in comparative studies (10/13); this hardly resulted in sufficient timeliness, neither according to predefined nor to standardized timeframes.
A minority of notification systems meets either predefined, standardized or disease specific timeframes. Systems including laboratory reporting are associated with timely notification. Electronic systems reduce reporting delay, but implementation needs considerable effort to comply with notification timeframes. During outbreak threats, patient, doctors and laboratory testing delays need to be reduced to achieve timely detection and notification. Public health authorities should incorporate procedures for this in their preparedness plans.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>29902216</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0198845</doi><tpages>e0198845</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1190-3443</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
| ispartof | PloS one, 2018-06, Vol.13 (6), p.e0198845-e0198845 |
| issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_plos_journals_2055611143 |
| source | MEDLINE; PubMed Central(OpenAccess); Public Library of Science; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry; EZB Electronic Journals Library |
| subjects | Analysis Automation Care and treatment Case management Cell phones Communicable Diseases Comparative studies Disease control Disease Notification - methods Electronic systems Engineering and Technology Epidemics Facsimile communication Health services Hepatitis Humans Infectious diseases Laboratories Laboratory tests Literature reviews Medical care Medical personnel Medicine and Health Sciences Outbreaks People and Places Physicians Public health Research and Analysis Methods Researchers Services Systematic review Time Factors |
| title | Timeliness of notification systems for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T17%3A45%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Timeliness%20of%20notification%20systems%20for%20infectious%20diseases:%20A%20systematic%20literature%20review&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Swaan,%20Corien&rft.date=2018-06-14&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=e0198845&rft.epage=e0198845&rft.pages=e0198845-e0198845&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0198845&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA543294674%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2055611143&rft_id=info:pmid/29902216&rft_galeid=A543294674&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_b8644309f3984fa2907d47b5a81c3493&rfr_iscdi=true |