• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

The 2009 A(H1N1) influenza pandemic in the French Armed Forces: evaluation of three surveillance systems

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Eur J Public Health. 2012 Aug 22. [Epub ahead of print]
The 2009 A(H1N1) influenza pandemic in the French Armed Forces: evaluation of three surveillance systems.
Gache K, Mayet A, Manet G, Ligier C, Piarroux M, Faure N, Trichereau J, Verret C, Decam C, Chaudet H, Rapp C, Queyriaux B, Deparis X, Migliani R, Meynard JB.
Source

1 Centre d'?pid?miologie et de sant? publique des arm?es, Saint Mand?, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:

The French military forces had to modify their epidemiological surveillance systems at the time of the 2009 A(H1N1) influenza pandemic. The aim of this article was to present an evaluation of the different systems used.
METHODS:

Two influenza surveillance systems are usually used in the French forces: one permanent (Surveillance ?pid?miologique des arm?es or SEA) and one seasonal (Syst?me militaire d'observation de la grippe or SMOG). The pandemic required the implementation of a daily surveillance system (Surveillance quotidienne-SQ), which aimed to monitor disrupted activity owing to 2009 A(H1N1) influenza. The qualitative evaluation of these three systems during the period from September 2009 to February 2010 was performed using 11 criteria based on the list defined by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of Atlanta.
RESULTS:

Although it included only 30 sentinel units vs. 320 for the other systems, the SMOG system was the best-performing system in terms of relevance, feasibility, efficacy, quality of data, usefulness, acceptability, efficiency and cost/benefits/costs ratio. The SQ proved very expensive in terms of logistics.
CONCLUSION:

The SQ did not bring any significant advantage compared with the weekly surveillance schemes. In the eventuality of another similar episode, influenza surveillance could be significantly improved by using the SMOG system extended to more units for better geographical coverage.

PMID:
22915791
[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22915791
 
Back
Top Bottom