Free course - Ebola in Context: Understanding Transmission, Response and Control

2014 Ebola Response in the U.S. – Use of Travel History within Clinical Workflow

Invitation for:

Date:    Thursday, October 16, 2014 

Time:    1:00 pm to 2:30pm Eastern Time

=====================================================================================

 The meeting agenda and the registration information for a special webinar are provided below. 

Important Notes:

·         GoToWebinar tool will be used and pre-registration is required. 

·         Even if you have already registered for our monthly webinars, this is a special session hence please follow the registration instructions listed below to receive an email with information on how to join this webinar.

o   After registration you will receive a unique participant link to join this webinar. This link should not be shared with others as it is unique to you.

o   If you have not used GoToWebinar before, you are advised to test your connectivity prior to the meeting. A link to connectivity test information is provided below.  

·         If you register for this webinar and cannot locate your unique participant link, please use the registration link provided below and your unique participant link will be resent to your email address.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When- Date: 10/16/2014 Time: 1p.m. to 2.30p.m. EDT

What- Special Webinar- Public Health and Electronic Health Records Vendor Collaboration Initiative

Agenda:

·         Presentation Title: 2014 Ebola Response in the U.S. – Use of Travel History within Clinical Workflow [45 minutes]

• Question and Answer Session - [45 minutes]

Presenters:

• Dana Meaney Delman – Deputy Lead Medical Care Task Force (Ebola Response), Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC)
• Timothy M. Uyeki- Clinical Team lead (Ebola Response), Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC)
• Jon White – Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT (ONC)
• Jim Daniel – Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT (ONC)
• Brian Lee- Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC)
• Laura Conn- Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC)

Abstract

In light of the confirmed U.S. cases of Ebola in Dallas, there is a lot of attention on electronic health records (EHRs) and their intersection with public health. The EHR vendor community has responded with components within their respective tools to address Ebola and assist within a healthcare environment.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT (ONC) will convene key stakeholders to encourage collaboration in the development of Ebola electronic screening tools. The CDC Ebola team will review the CDC clinical algorithm and checklist for evaluation of individuals with suspected Ebola Virus Disease (EVD), with the intent to explore the inclusion of travel history and assessment of pertinent clinical signs and symptoms into a electronic format that will alert clinicians to consider the diagnosis of EVD. Additionally, the ONC will lead a discussion on how existing products may be configured to support screening protocols. The presentations will be followed by a Question & Answer session for EHR vendors and public health practitioners.

Webinar Registration Instructions

Pre-register for this online event at: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/7081033365571067649

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.

GoToWebinar System Requirements and Connectivity Test Information

View GoToWebinar System Requirements: http://support.citrixonline.com/s/G2W/Help/SystemRequirements

Connectivity Test Information: https://support.citrixonline.com/en_US/gotomeeting/help_files/GTM140010?title=Test+Your+GoToMeeting+Connection

 Kindly let us know, if you have questions or need more information by writing to us at meaningfuluse@cdc.gov

From ISID: Ebola Safety Training Course Travel Grants

Dear Colleague,

In response to the 2014 Ebola outbreak in West Africa, ISID has searched for ways to assist the people most affected. We are pleased to announce that we are sponsoring a limited number of travel grants to individuals who are attending one of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Ebola Safety Training Courses. The courses will help prepare healthcare personnel to provide medical care to Ebola patients in an established Ebola Treatment Unit (ETU).

The first CDC Ebola Safety Training Course starts on Oct 6, 2014 and the schedule currently extends through the end of this year. The courses are open to healthcare workers from all over the world and are being offered free of charge, but participants are responsible for paying for their own travel to the course in Alabama. Full information on the CDC course: http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/hcp/safety-training-course/index.html

Only individuals who have been accepted to the CDC Ebola Safety Training Course and who will deploy to West Africa after completion of the course will be eligible for ISID funding. Travel grants of $500 each will be awarded to US residents and $1000 to residents of other countries. For more information on the ISID CDC Ebola Safety Training travel grant please go to: http://www.isid.org/grants/grant_ebola_training_travel.shtml

Also, I hope that you are aware of the excellent coverage that our program, ProMED, has provided in daily updates on the Ebola outbreak. You can sign up for ProMED alerts for free at: http://www.promedmail.org.

Sincerely,

Britta Lassmann, MD

ISID Program Director

Larry Madoff, MD

Editor, ProMED-mail

Jon Cohen, MD

ISID President

Surveillance for Emerging Infectious Diseases - A Letter from ISDS Board of Directors' President Richard Hopkins

In case we needed any reminding, new infectious disease threats keep emerging, as evidenced by Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), chikungunya in the western hemisphere, and Ebola in West Africa. As surveillance professionals, we are likely to be looked to for data to support detection and response efforts, but also for advice as to where strategic investments in surveillance should be made in the course of an epidemic to support the response.  Deciding on the optimal surveillance strategy requires the advice of a seasoned surveillance practitioner, but also an understanding of the goals of the outbreak response and of the control measures being put into place.  The system needs to generate the information that is needed for decision-making by those leading the response, in time to be useful.

There are several important tasks for the surveillance function — all of course in support of more effective prevention and control:

— recognize the introduction of an infectious agent into a new population as early as possible.

— for diseases with a case-by-case public health response, identify every case promptly so that control measures can be taken

— identify the population groups at greatest risk of infection, of disease, and of severe disease or death

— monitor population impact of severe as well as mild disease

— monitor the geographic distribution, size, trajectory and end of the outbreak, epidemic or pandemic that may result from an introduction

— help to determine whether control measures are being effective

Some kinds of important questions probably can’t be answered through surveillance, but instead would be answered through focused case and contact investigations during outbreaks, or by planned cohort, cross-sectional or case-control studies.  For example, when in the natural course of infection and illness are people infectious to others?  How many asymptomatic infections are occurring?

The tools we have at hand to accomplish surveillance goals are diverse, and the right mix of these tools will vary depending on the disease, the epidemiologic situation, and the stage of the event:

— individual case reports of suspected cases from clinicians, both through the reportable disease mechanism and as clinician calls to public health authorities about unusual or alarming cases of disease

— laboratory reports from clinical laboratories, including reference laboratories, and from public health laboratories, either of increased detection of the condition of interest or of inability to characterize certain infections

— notifications of or queries about apparent disease outbreaks, by any of a wide variety of reporters: physicians, school nurses, child care center operators, organizers of group events, news media reporters, etc.

— increased chatter or mention of certain symptoms or diseases on blogs, internet news sites, social media sites, etc

— numbers of deaths recorded with certain causes of death mentioned on the death certificate

— numbers of visits to sentinel practices with a syndrome suggesting the presence of the emerging pathogen

— number of hospital admissions, or ICU admissions, with a syndrome suggesting the presence of the emerging pathogen, or with a suggestive admitting diagnosis

— numbers of visits to emergency departments, urgent care centers and other sites participating in syndromic surveillance, either with a syndrome suggesting the presence of the emerging pathogen or with mention of the name of the pathogen in free-text chief complaint or diagnostic fields.

For all these tools, it is easiest to recognize cases of an emerging infection if the disease caused by the infectious agent has clinical characteristics that make it distinctive, or if there is a specific laboratory test.  Detection is also aided, early in an event, if a specific unusual travel history or other exposure is associated with likelihood of illness.  The more generic the symptoms are — which is especially likely early in the illness — the harder it will be to detect likely cases by presenting illness alone, and either a specific exposure history or laboratory testing will be necessary to detect likely cases.  Even with fairly generic symptoms, however — as is the case with the syndrome of influenza-like illness — tallying of healthcare visits by syndrome in comparison to a baseline can be helpful in monitoring the size, scope and direction of an established epidemic.  Alternatively, surveillance can be focused on fully-developed disease which is more clinically distinctive, but this has a cost in sensitivity and timeliness of case and outbreak detection.

The underlying point of this little essay is that the optimal surveillance strategy for an emerging infection will depend on the disease's clinical and epidemiologic characteristics, the current stage of the outbreak, the control strategy that needs to be supported, and the relative costs of missing true significant events and of investigating large numbers of unimportant events.   The optimal strategy will depend on the desired balance among sensitivity, positive predictive value, and timeliness (whether for cases or for outbreaks).  These three are always in tension with each other.  Optimizing one of these attributes leads to compromises in at least one of the others, unless there is significant system change.  Those in charge of the response to a threat from an emerging pathogen, with a given set of surveillance systems available to them, will need to decide what the desired balance is between high sensitivity (with its cost of false alarms), high positive predictive value (with its costs of decreased sensitivity and slower detection) and increased timeliness (with its costs in both decreased positive predictive value and decreased sensitivity).  

Improvements in key characteristics of surveillance systems can decrease the danger from these tradeoffs. For example, implementing electronic laboratory reporting can improve timeliness of case detection with little or no cost in sensitivity or positive predictive value, as can implementing electronic (as opposed to manual) syndromic surveillance.  New diagnostic tests that can be performed at the bedside, or even in the field by EMTs, can in theory improve all three parameters, depending on how reliable they are under bedside or field conditions.

Richard Hopkins

ISDS Board of Directors' President

CUGH Letter from Executive Director re: Ebola Outbreak

Dear Friend of CUGH,   The Ebola crisis in West Africa is rapidly worsening. As of the writing of this note, over 3,500 people have been infected with the virus and over 1,700 people have been killed. Alarmingly, the disease is spreading into densely populated urban areas.  There is an acute shortage of medical supplies, experienced healthcare workers, and funds in the region. Doctors without Borders has been bravely shouldering the greatest responsibility to not only care for those infected with Ebola, but also treat people affected with the numerous other diseases and health challenges in this, one of the poorest regions of the world.  We at CUGH are trying to help MSF and USAID identify individuals with the experience and skills needed to stop the spread of this virus and provide essential medical care in the affected countries. Please see MSF's request by clicking on this link  and USAID's request by clicking on this link  and share these with your colleagues widely. Help us identify individuals who can address this crisis before it spreads much further and advocate for greater funding to purchase essential supplies.  We have also been engaging with the State Department and other US government agencies to address this crisis. Please see my  Op-Ed in the Toronto Star on a civil-military humanitarian relief effort to urgently save lives and stop the spread of this deadly disease. Thank you for your assistance. Best wishes,   Keith Martin, MD Executive Director Consortium of Universities for Global Health