Surveillance
|
Main topics
can be found within the left column;
sub-topics and/or research reports can be
found near the bottom of this page. Thank you
|
|
 |
A
new addition to the HEART is our
Forum-check
it out
|
"In 1878, Congress authorized the
U.S. Marine Hospital Service (i.e., the forerunner of
the Public Health Service {PHS}) to collect morbidity
reports regarding cholera, smallpox, plague, and
yellow fever from U.S. consuls overseas; this
information was to be used for instituting quarantine
measures to prevent the introduction and spread of
these diseases into the United States. In 1879, a
specific Congressional appropriation was made for the
collection and publication of reports of these
notifiable diseases. The authority for weekly
reporting and publication of these reports was
expanded by Congress in 1893 to include data from
states and municipal authorities. To increase the
uniformity of the data, Congress enacted a law in 1902
directing the Surgeon General to provide forms for the
collection and compilation of data and for the
publication of reports at the national level. In 1912,
state and territorial health authorities -- in
conjunction with PHS -- recommended immediate
telegraphic reporting of five infectious diseases and
the monthly reporting, by letter, of 10 additional
diseases. The first annual summary of The Notifiable
Diseases in 1912 included reports of 10 diseases from
19 states, the District of Columbia, and Hawaii. By
1928, all states, the District of Columbia, Hawaii,
and Puerto Rico were participating in national
reporting of 29 specified diseases. At their annual
meeting in 1950, the State and Territorial Health
Officers authorized a conference of state and
territorial epidemiologists whose purpose was to
determine which diseases should be reported to PHS. In
1961, CDC assumed responsibility for the collection
and publication of data concerning nationally
notifiable diseases.
The list of nationally notifiable diseases is
revised periodically. For example, a disease may be
added to the list as a new pathogen emerges, or a
disease may be deleted as its incidence declines.
Public health officials at state health departments
and CDC continue to collaborate in determining which
diseases should be nationally notifiable; CSTE, with
input from CDC, makes recommendations annually for
additions and deletions to the list of nationally
notifiable diseases. However, reporting of nationally
notifiable diseases to CDC by the states is voluntary.
Reporting is currently mandated (i.e., by state
legislation or regulation) only at the state level.
The list of diseases that are considered notifiable,
therefore, varies slightly by state. All states
generally report the internationally quarantinable
diseases (i.e., cholera, plague, and yellow fever) in
compliance with the World Health Organization's
International Health Regulations. "
—Summary of Notifiable Diseases, United
States, 1995
|
Document Name & Link to
Document
|
Description
|
File Size /Type**
|
|
1999
OSH Summary Estimates
|
Work
related injury and illnesses
|
48
kb pdf
|
|
A
compilation of the Ryan White Care Act of 1990,
as amended by the Ryan White Care Act Amendment
of 1996
|
Complete
text of the ACT
|
143
kb pdf
|
|
A
Guidebook for Resettlement Agencies Serving
Refugees with HIV/AIDS
|
The
purpose of this publication is to assist
resettlement agencies in preparing for and
providing care to refugees who are living with
HIV/AIDS. We hope that his guidebook will serve
as a resource for resettlement agencies and
establish basic standards of care for
HIV-positive refugees.
|
69
kb pdf
|
|
|
|
AIDS
Brief: Town and Regional Planners
|
The
importance of considering HIV/AIDS in town and
regional planning may not perhaps be immediately
apparent. However, a brief reflection reveals
multiple situations where an understanding of
the HIV/AIDS epidemic and the subsequent
consideration of this in planning can have a
significan impact on the estent to which the
emerging epidemic will influence the livelihood
of communities
|
446
kb pdf
|
|
AMBION Risk Management Model
|
Any
good Health and Safety Management System ensures
that change to, or outside influence on,
existing facilities and operations should be
assessed in relation to impact on health, safety
and environmental standards.
|
|
|
BioTerrorism
|
Report to the Subcommitte on Government efficiency
|
1,229 kb pdf
|
|
Delays
in treatment
|
While
hospital Emergency Departments (EDs) are the
source of just over one-half of all reported
sentinel event cases of patient death or
permanent injury due to delays in treatment,
Joint Commission sentinel event data reveal that
such serious problems can occur in any hospital
unit, as well as in other health care settings.
|
|
|
Green
Book-AIDS Impact Model (AIM)
|
Methods
for building political commitment for effective
HIV/AIDS policies and Programs
|
774
kb pdf
|
|
Grey
Book Federal OSHA Bloodborne Pathogen Directive
|
A
Resource Primer of OSHA regulations
|
509
kb pdf
|
|
HIV
report form of exposure
|
Exposure
report form for law enforcement of California
|
80
kb pdf
|
|
HIV/AIDS
Surveillance Report-1996
|
Report
from CDC includes tables and graphs
|
538
kb pdf
|
|
HIV/AIDS
Surveillance Report-1996
|
Has
additional table and graphs
|
749
kb pdf
|
|
National
Health Interview Survey-2001
|
Report
from the National Center for Health Statistics
|
974
kb pdf
|
|
National
HIV Prevalence Surveys 1997 Summary
|
Report
from the CDC
|
2,406
kb pdf
|
|
National
Surveillance System For Health Care Workers
|
Needlestick
and other percutaneous injuries (PIs) pose the
greatest risk of occupational transmission of
bloodborne viruses to health-care workers (HCWs).
The annual number of PIs sustained by U.S. HCWs
have been estimated using a variety of methods
and have ranged from 100,000-1,000,000.
|
|
|
NHIS
Survey Description
|
Methodology
for survey
|
178
kb pdf
|
|
Policy
Statements Adopted by the Governing Council of
the American Public Health Ass. 1999
|
Areas
of concern
|
486
kb pdf
|
|
Research
for Sale
|
The
ties between clinical researchers and industry
include not only grant support, but also a host
of other financial arrangements. These include
researchers who serve as consultants, join
advisory boards, enter into patent and royalty
agreements, promote drugs and devices at
company-sponsored symposium, and accept
expensive gifts and trips.
|
|
|
Ryan
White Care Act Amendments of 2000
|
Section
by section summary
|
26
kb pdf
|
|
STD
Screening, Testing, Case Reporting, and Clinical
and Partner Notification Practices: A National
Survey of US Physicians
|
STD
screening levels are well below practice
guidelines for women and virtually nonexistent
for men. Case reporting levels are below those
legally mandated; physicians rely instead on
patients for partner notification. Health
departments must increase collaboration with
private physicians to improve the quality of STD
care
|
115
kb pdf
|
|
|
|
Surveillance
of occupational exposure to bloodborne pathogens
in health care workers: the Italian national programme
|
Health
care workers (HCWs) face a serious risk of
acquiring bloodborne infections, in particular
hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (Hepatitis C Virus),
and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), all of
which are associated with significant morbidity
and mortality.
|
|
|
Surveillance,
Social Risk, and Symbolism: Framing the Analysis
for Research and Policy
|
Name-based
surveillance for HIV, considered in and of
itself, is a useful public health measure, the
benefits of which far outweigh direct costs.
There is little evidence that name-based
surveillance directly deters individuals at risk
of HIV from being tested, or exposes them to
significant social risks. Yet the imposition of
surveillance by name has been chronically
controversial, steadfastly opposed by HIV
advocates, civil libertarians, and even some
public health professionals.
|
|
|
The
Defense Medical Surveillance System and the
Department of Defense Serum Repository: Glimpses
of the Future of Public Health Surveillance
|
The
Defense Medical Surveillance System (DDSS) is
the central repository of medical surveillance
data of medical surveillance data for the US
armed forces.
|
144
kb pdf
|
|
The
State of Health Care Quality: 2002
|
The
American health care system is one of
interdependent relationship: doctor and patient,
doctor and health care organization, and
enrollee and organization.
|
776
kb pdf
|
|
Updated
Guidelines for Evaluating Public Health
Surveillance Systems Recommendations from the
Guidelines Working Group
|
The
purpose of evaluating public health surveillance
systems is to ensure that problemsof public
health importance are being monitored
efficiently and effectively. Public health
surveillance systems should be evaluated
periodically, and the evaluation should include
recommendations for improving quality,
efficiency, and usefulness. The goal of these
guidelines is to organize the evaluation of a
public health surveillance system. Broad topics
are outlined into which program-specific
qualities can be integrated. Evaluation of a
public health surveillance system focuses on how
well the system operates to meet its purpose and
objectives.
|
|
** In order to view PDF files, you must have Adobe
Acrobat Reader installed on your computer. Many
computers already have this software; however, if you
need it, a free copy is available for download at this
site: Click
here to get Adobe Acrobat Reader.
|
