Electronic Surveillance System Integration: A Reality Check of Advantages and Disadvantages

Tuesday, June 24, 2014: 4:00 PM
103, Nashville Convention Center
Aaron Fleischauer , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Raleigh, NC
Mark Dittman , Pennsylvania Department of Health, Harrisburg, PA
Richard N Danila , Minnesota Department of Health, St. Paul, MN
Erin Holt , Tennessee Department of Health, Nashville, TN
Janet Hamilton , Florida Department of Health, Tallahassee, FL

BACKGROUND:   Since the introduction of electronic disease surveillance systems, states and localities have worked to migrate disparate and siloed legacy surveillance systems into integrated surveillance system. The goals for system integration are to utilize standards, reduce redundancy, streamline reporting, monitor disease overlap and increase data sharing. However, the costs, benefits and obstacles of achieving complete surveillance system integration are poorly understood.  This interactive panel session will seek to outline a framework for defining electronic disease surveillance system integration. Three presenters will briefly present their jurisdiction’s recent experience in surveillance integration. The panel will then pose questions to attendees including: “What model of integration do you employ and what systems or disease modules applies?”, “What is your jurisdiction’s goal for integration?” “What costs, informatics and data sharing barriers, and policies have affected system integration?”, “What workforce and training issues have you encountered?”  Surveillance system integration of disparate disease systems is routinely identified as a priority by CDC, state and local public health agencies. This panel session will attempt to develop consensus on the scope of surveillance system integration and outline a strategy for sharing costs, benefits and challenges experienced by state and local health departments.  Furthermore, the session will try to connect states with similar surveillance system architectures, program area integrations, and/or current development status to assist them in further application.  Responses to panel questions will be used to outline a CSTE position statement on disease surveillance system integration.

METHODS:  [empty]

RESULTS:  [empty]

CONCLUSIONS:  [empty]