Meeting the International Health Regulations (2005) surveillance core capacity requirements at the subnational level in Europe: The added value of syndromic surveillance

Alexandra Ziemann, Nicole Rosenkötter, Luis Garcia Castrillo Riesgo, Matthias Fischer, Alexander Krämer, Freddy K. Lippert, Gernot Vergeiner, Helmut Brand, Thomas Krafft

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The revised World Health Organization's International Health Regulations (2005) request a timely and all-hazard approach towards surveillance, especially at the subnational level. We discuss three questions of syndromic surveillance application in the European context for assessing public health emergencies of international concern: (i) can syndromic surveillance support countries, especially the subnational level, to meet the International Health Regulations (2005) core surveillance capacity requirements, (ii) are European syndromic surveillance systems comparable to enable cross-border surveillance, and (iii) at which administrative level should syndromic surveillance best be applied? Discussion: Despite the ongoing criticism on the usefulness of syndromic surveillance which is related to its clinically nonspecific output, we demonstrate that it was a suitable supplement for timely assessment of the impact of three different public health emergencies affecting Europe. Subnational syndromic surveillance analysis in some cases proved to be of advantage for detecting an event earlier compared to national level analysis. However, in many cases, syndromic surveillance did not detect local events with only a small number of cases. The European Commission envisions comparability of surveillance output to enable cross-border surveillance. Evaluated against European infectious disease case definitions, syndromic surveillance can contribute to identify cases that might fulfil the clinical case definition but the approach is too unspecific to comply to complete clinical definitions. Syndromic surveillance results still seem feasible for comparable cross-border surveillance as similarly defined syndromes are analysed. We suggest a new model of implementing syndromic surveillance at the subnational level. In this model, syndromic surveillance systems are fine-tuned to their local context and integrated into the existing subnational surveillance and reporting structure. By enhancing population coverage, events covering several jurisdictions can be identified at higher levels. However, the setup of decentralised and locally adjusted syndromic surveillance systems is more complex compared to the setup of one national or local system. Summary: We conclude that syndromic surveillance if implemented with large population coverage at the subnational level can help detect and assess the local and regional effect of different types of public health emergencies in a timely manner as required by the International Health Regulations (2005).

Original languageEnglish
Article number107
JournalBMC Public Health
Volume15
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-01-2015

Fingerprint

Emergencies
Public Health
Health
Population
Communicable Diseases

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Ziemann, Alexandra ; Rosenkötter, Nicole ; Riesgo, Luis Garcia Castrillo ; Fischer, Matthias ; Krämer, Alexander ; Lippert, Freddy K. ; Vergeiner, Gernot ; Brand, Helmut ; Krafft, Thomas. / Meeting the International Health Regulations (2005) surveillance core capacity requirements at the subnational level in Europe : The added value of syndromic surveillance. In: BMC Public Health. 2015 ; Vol. 15, No. 1.
@article{be14b2c3d34d420f9f68ae3039d7764e,
title = "Meeting the International Health Regulations (2005) surveillance core capacity requirements at the subnational level in Europe: The added value of syndromic surveillance",
abstract = "Background: The revised World Health Organization's International Health Regulations (2005) request a timely and all-hazard approach towards surveillance, especially at the subnational level. We discuss three questions of syndromic surveillance application in the European context for assessing public health emergencies of international concern: (i) can syndromic surveillance support countries, especially the subnational level, to meet the International Health Regulations (2005) core surveillance capacity requirements, (ii) are European syndromic surveillance systems comparable to enable cross-border surveillance, and (iii) at which administrative level should syndromic surveillance best be applied? Discussion: Despite the ongoing criticism on the usefulness of syndromic surveillance which is related to its clinically nonspecific output, we demonstrate that it was a suitable supplement for timely assessment of the impact of three different public health emergencies affecting Europe. Subnational syndromic surveillance analysis in some cases proved to be of advantage for detecting an event earlier compared to national level analysis. However, in many cases, syndromic surveillance did not detect local events with only a small number of cases. The European Commission envisions comparability of surveillance output to enable cross-border surveillance. Evaluated against European infectious disease case definitions, syndromic surveillance can contribute to identify cases that might fulfil the clinical case definition but the approach is too unspecific to comply to complete clinical definitions. Syndromic surveillance results still seem feasible for comparable cross-border surveillance as similarly defined syndromes are analysed. We suggest a new model of implementing syndromic surveillance at the subnational level. In this model, syndromic surveillance systems are fine-tuned to their local context and integrated into the existing subnational surveillance and reporting structure. By enhancing population coverage, events covering several jurisdictions can be identified at higher levels. However, the setup of decentralised and locally adjusted syndromic surveillance systems is more complex compared to the setup of one national or local system. Summary: We conclude that syndromic surveillance if implemented with large population coverage at the subnational level can help detect and assess the local and regional effect of different types of public health emergencies in a timely manner as required by the International Health Regulations (2005).",
author = "Alexandra Ziemann and Nicole Rosenk{\"o}tter and Riesgo, {Luis Garcia Castrillo} and Matthias Fischer and Alexander Kr{\"a}mer and Lippert, {Freddy K.} and Gernot Vergeiner and Helmut Brand and Thomas Krafft",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1186/s12889-015-1421-2",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
journal = "BMC Public Health",
issn = "1471-2458",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

Meeting the International Health Regulations (2005) surveillance core capacity requirements at the subnational level in Europe : The added value of syndromic surveillance. / Ziemann, Alexandra; Rosenkötter, Nicole; Riesgo, Luis Garcia Castrillo; Fischer, Matthias; Krämer, Alexander; Lippert, Freddy K.; Vergeiner, Gernot; Brand, Helmut; Krafft, Thomas.

In: BMC Public Health, Vol. 15, No. 1, 107, 01.01.2015.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Meeting the International Health Regulations (2005) surveillance core capacity requirements at the subnational level in Europe

T2 - The added value of syndromic surveillance

AU - Ziemann, Alexandra

AU - Rosenkötter, Nicole

AU - Riesgo, Luis Garcia Castrillo

AU - Fischer, Matthias

AU - Krämer, Alexander

AU - Lippert, Freddy K.

AU - Vergeiner, Gernot

AU - Brand, Helmut

AU - Krafft, Thomas

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - Background: The revised World Health Organization's International Health Regulations (2005) request a timely and all-hazard approach towards surveillance, especially at the subnational level. We discuss three questions of syndromic surveillance application in the European context for assessing public health emergencies of international concern: (i) can syndromic surveillance support countries, especially the subnational level, to meet the International Health Regulations (2005) core surveillance capacity requirements, (ii) are European syndromic surveillance systems comparable to enable cross-border surveillance, and (iii) at which administrative level should syndromic surveillance best be applied? Discussion: Despite the ongoing criticism on the usefulness of syndromic surveillance which is related to its clinically nonspecific output, we demonstrate that it was a suitable supplement for timely assessment of the impact of three different public health emergencies affecting Europe. Subnational syndromic surveillance analysis in some cases proved to be of advantage for detecting an event earlier compared to national level analysis. However, in many cases, syndromic surveillance did not detect local events with only a small number of cases. The European Commission envisions comparability of surveillance output to enable cross-border surveillance. Evaluated against European infectious disease case definitions, syndromic surveillance can contribute to identify cases that might fulfil the clinical case definition but the approach is too unspecific to comply to complete clinical definitions. Syndromic surveillance results still seem feasible for comparable cross-border surveillance as similarly defined syndromes are analysed. We suggest a new model of implementing syndromic surveillance at the subnational level. In this model, syndromic surveillance systems are fine-tuned to their local context and integrated into the existing subnational surveillance and reporting structure. By enhancing population coverage, events covering several jurisdictions can be identified at higher levels. However, the setup of decentralised and locally adjusted syndromic surveillance systems is more complex compared to the setup of one national or local system. Summary: We conclude that syndromic surveillance if implemented with large population coverage at the subnational level can help detect and assess the local and regional effect of different types of public health emergencies in a timely manner as required by the International Health Regulations (2005).

AB - Background: The revised World Health Organization's International Health Regulations (2005) request a timely and all-hazard approach towards surveillance, especially at the subnational level. We discuss three questions of syndromic surveillance application in the European context for assessing public health emergencies of international concern: (i) can syndromic surveillance support countries, especially the subnational level, to meet the International Health Regulations (2005) core surveillance capacity requirements, (ii) are European syndromic surveillance systems comparable to enable cross-border surveillance, and (iii) at which administrative level should syndromic surveillance best be applied? Discussion: Despite the ongoing criticism on the usefulness of syndromic surveillance which is related to its clinically nonspecific output, we demonstrate that it was a suitable supplement for timely assessment of the impact of three different public health emergencies affecting Europe. Subnational syndromic surveillance analysis in some cases proved to be of advantage for detecting an event earlier compared to national level analysis. However, in many cases, syndromic surveillance did not detect local events with only a small number of cases. The European Commission envisions comparability of surveillance output to enable cross-border surveillance. Evaluated against European infectious disease case definitions, syndromic surveillance can contribute to identify cases that might fulfil the clinical case definition but the approach is too unspecific to comply to complete clinical definitions. Syndromic surveillance results still seem feasible for comparable cross-border surveillance as similarly defined syndromes are analysed. We suggest a new model of implementing syndromic surveillance at the subnational level. In this model, syndromic surveillance systems are fine-tuned to their local context and integrated into the existing subnational surveillance and reporting structure. By enhancing population coverage, events covering several jurisdictions can be identified at higher levels. However, the setup of decentralised and locally adjusted syndromic surveillance systems is more complex compared to the setup of one national or local system. Summary: We conclude that syndromic surveillance if implemented with large population coverage at the subnational level can help detect and assess the local and regional effect of different types of public health emergencies in a timely manner as required by the International Health Regulations (2005).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84924066661&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84924066661&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s12889-015-1421-2

DO - 10.1186/s12889-015-1421-2

M3 - Review article

C2 - 25879869

AN - SCOPUS:84924066661

VL - 15

JO - BMC Public Health

JF - BMC Public Health

SN - 1471-2458

IS - 1

M1 - 107

ER -