» Articles » PMID: 33006301

Automated Digital Reporting of Clinical Laboratory Information to National Public Health Surveillance Systems, Results of a EU/EEA Survey, 2018

Overview
Journal Euro Surveill
Date 2020 Oct 2
PMID 33006301
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

BackgroundTimely reporting of microbiology test results is essential for infection management. Automated, machine-to-machine (M2M) reporting of diagnostic and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) data from laboratory information management systems (LIMS) to public health agencies improves timeliness and completeness of communicable disease surveillance.AimWe surveyed microbiology data reporting practices for national surveillance of EU-notifiable diseases in European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA) countries in 2018.MethodsEuropean Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) National Microbiology and Surveillance Focal Points completed a questionnaire on the modalities and scope of clinical microbiology laboratory data reporting.ResultsComplete data were provided for all 30 EU/EEA countries. Clinical laboratories used a LIMS in 28 countries. LIMS data on EU-notifiable diseases and AMR were M2M-reported to the national level in 14 and nine countries, respectively. In the 14 countries, associated demographic data reported allowed the de-duplication of patient reports. In 13 countries, M2M-reported data were used for cluster detection at the national level. M2M laboratory data reporting had been validated against conventional surveillance methods in six countries, and replaced those in five. Barriers to M2M reporting included lack of information technology support and financial incentives.ConclusionM2M-reported laboratory data were used for national public health surveillance and alert purposes in nearly half of the EU/EEA countries in 2018. Reported data on infectious diseases and AMR varied in extent and disease coverage across countries and laboratories. Improving automated laboratory-based surveillance will depend on financial and regulatory incentives, and harmonisation of health information and communication systems.

Citing Articles

Does integration with national registers improve the data completeness of local COVID-19 contact tracing tools? A register-based study in Norway, May 2020 - September 2021.

Meijerink H, Shelil M, Jani-Bolstad J, Dvergsdal E, Madslien E, Wilberg M BMC Health Serv Res. 2024; 24(1):96.

PMID: 38233812 PMC: 10795336. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-023-10540-5.


Findings in Danish long-term care facilities in the first year of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Espenhain L, Funk T, Kunoe A, Chaine M, Moller K, Kristensen B Eur Geriatr Med. 2023; 14(3):527-535.

PMID: 37199871 PMC: 10193337. DOI: 10.1007/s41999-023-00793-y.


Laboratory-based surveillance of antimicrobial resistance in regions of Kenya: An assessment of capacities, practices, and barriers by means of multi-facility survey.

Moirongo R, Aglanu L, Lamshoft M, Adero B, Yator S, Anyona S Front Public Health. 2022; 10:1003178.

PMID: 36518572 PMC: 9742437. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1003178.


Web-based, rapid and contactless management of ambulatory patients for SARS-CoV-2-testing.

Stemler J, Cornely O, Noack-Schonborn T, Fohrholz C, Schumacher S, Poluschkin L BMC Infect Dis. 2021; 21(1):535.

PMID: 34098882 PMC: 8182346. DOI: 10.1186/s12879-021-06249-7.


Electronic reporting of diagnostic laboratory test results from all healthcare sectors is a cornerstone of national preparedness and control of COVID-19 in Denmark.

Schonning K, Dessau R, Jensen T, Thorsen N, Wiuff C, Nielsen L APMIS. 2021; 129(7):438-451.

PMID: 33949007 PMC: 8239934. DOI: 10.1111/apm.13140.


References
1.
Enki D, Noufaily A, Garthwaite P, Andrews N, Charlett A, Lane C . Automated biosurveillance data from England and Wales, 1991-2011. Emerg Infect Dis. 2012; 19(1):35-42. PMC: 3557985. DOI: 10.3201/eid1901.120493. View

2.
Gluskin R, Mavinkurve M, Varma J . Government leadership in addressing public health priorities: strides and delays in electronic laboratory reporting in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2014; 104(3):e16-21. PMC: 3953791. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301753. View

3.
Bragstad K, Emborg H, Fischer T, Voldstedlund M, Gubbels S, Andersen B . Low vaccine effectiveness against influenza A(H3N2) virus among elderly people in Denmark in 2012/13--a rapid epidemiological and virological assessment. Euro Surveill. 2013; 18(6). View

4.
. ECDC, EFSA and EMA Joint Scientific Opinion on a list of outcome indicators as regards surveillance of antimicrobial resistance and antimicrobial consumption in humans and food-producing animals. EFSA J. 2020; 15(10):e05017. PMC: 7009961. DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.5017. View

5.
Abat C, Chaudet H, Colson P, Rolain J, Raoult D . Real-Time Microbiology Laboratory Surveillance System to Detect Abnormal Events and Emerging Infections, Marseille, France. Emerg Infect Dis. 2015; 21(8):1302-10. PMC: 4517727. DOI: 10.3201/eid2108.141419. View