CANCELLED on 5/31/17 - Thoughtful Public Health Reporting: How Does What You Ask Impact What You Get?

Key Objectives:

1. Consider how the questions, directions, and process impact data completeness, accuracy, and timeliness for the initial report to public health.
2. Explore the purpose of the initial report to public health vs. a case report form completed during the public health investigation.
3. Explore how to balance asking for enough information in the initial report to public health to investigate vs. overburdening reporters during the reporting process.
4. Consider and discuss one approach to minimizing the burden on both public health and reporters when conducting follow-up for additional health information on a patient.

Brief Summary:
Diseases reportable to public health in Tennessee are generally reported by healthcare providers or laboratories, although anyone suspecting or knowing of a case of a reportable disease, condition, or event is required to report. Public health reports often lack patient demographics or provider contact information, impeding the public health investigation. Following up with the reporter for missing information is time-consuming for both partners, and further delays the investigation. Ahead of the 2017 reporting period, Tennessee Department of Health evaluated the reporting process, which included seeking feedback from healthcare providers, laboratories, the state public health laboratory, and state and local public health professionals, and yielded the following results:

• Feedback emphasized the need to minimize the burden on reporters, while maximizing the information needed by public health to conduct an investigation.
• The purpose of the initial report to public health was reexamined and clarified as the starting point for an investigation, and not the primary source of information for a case status determination.
• Only condition-specific questions identified as sufficient to an investigation were added or maintained for the 2017 reporting form. As an example, for some tickborne diseases, a patient is not a case without fever and therefore no additional follow-up is needed. Obtaining this information in the initial report has the potential to save time that would otherwise be lost to unnecessary follow-up.
• The reporting process was revised to allow more flexibility in how to report, including what documents are provided and the method of reporting. For 2017, an online reporting survey was created in REDCap to allow reporters.

The impact of the reporting changes during the first six months of 2017 will be shared to further discussions about how what we ask from reporters in the initial report can impact the information they provide, as well as the investigative process.