Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-dvtzq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-11T05:46:58.155Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mississippi's Infectious Disease Hotline: A Surveillance and Education Model for Future Disasters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Andrew M. J. Cavey ,
Jonathan M. Spector ,
Derek Ehrhardt ,
Theresa Kittle ,
Mills McNeill ,
P. Gregg Greenough  and
Thomas D. Kirsch
Andrew M. J. Cavey*
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Jonathan M. Spector
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Derek Ehrhardt
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Theresa Kittle
Affiliation:
Mississippi Department of Health, Jackson, Mississippi, USA
Mills McNeill
Affiliation:
Mississippi Department of Health, Jackson, Mississippi, USA
P. Gregg Greenough
Affiliation:
Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Thomas D. Kirsch
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
*
50b Cambridge Road London SW11 4RR United Kingdom E-mail: andrew.cavey@post.harvard.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction:

The potential for outbreaks of epidemic disease among displaced residents was a significant public health concern in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. In response, the Mississippi Department of Health (MDH) and the American Red Cross (ARC) implemented a novel infectious disease surveillance system, in the form of a telephone “hotline”, to detect and rapidly respond to health threats in shelters.

Methods:

All ARC-managed shelters in Mississippi were included in the surveillance system. A symptom-based, case reporting method was developed and distributed to shelter staff, who were linked with MDH and ARC professionals by a toll-free telephone service. Hotline staff investigated potential infectious disease outbreaks, provided assistance to shelter staff regarding optimal patient care, and helped facilitate the evaluation of ill evacuees by local medical personnel.

Results:

Forty-three shelters sheltering 3,520 evacuees participated in the program. Seventeen shelters made 29 calls notifying the hotline of the following cases: (1) fever (6 cases); (2) respiratory infections (37 cases); (3) bloody diarrhea (2 cases); (4) watery diarrhea (15 cases); and (5) other, including rashes (33 cases). Thirty-four of these patients were referred to a local physician or hospital for further diagnosis and disease management. Three cases of chickenpox were identified. No significant infectious disease outbreaks occurred and no deaths were reported.

Conclusions:

The surveillance system used direct verbal communication between shelter staff and hotline managers to enable more rapid reporting, mapping, investigation, and intervention, far beyond the capabilities of a more passive or paper-based system. It also allowed for immediate feedback and education for staff unfamiliar with the diseases and reporting process. Replication of this program should be considered during future disasters when health surveillance of a large, disseminated shelter population is necessary.

Keywords

disasterseducation modelhotlineHurricane Katrinainfectious diseasesMississippi

Information

Type
Special Report
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , February 2009 , pp. 11 - 17
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Weather Service Hurricane Center: Hurricane Katrina. Available at http://www.nhc.noaa.gov.archive.2005.pub.al122005.public.020.shtml. Accessed 12 March 2008.Google Scholar
2. Lang, S: Katrina Intensifies into a Powerful Hurricane, Strikes Northern Gulf Coast. In: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Available at http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/katrina_trmm_0828_0829.html. Accessed 12 March 2008.Google Scholar
3. Mississippi State Department for Health: The annual statistical publication for Mississippi. Available at http://www.msdh.state.ms.us/phs/stat2005.htm. Accessed 06 April 2008.Google Scholar
4. Mississippi Emergency Management Agency: Red Cross Damage Assessments. Available at http://www.msema.org/redcrossassessments.htm. Accessed 15 November 2005.Google Scholar
5. Mississippi Emergency Management Agency. Available at http://www.msema.org/newsreleases/documents/pr100.doc. Accessed 15 November 2005.Google Scholar
6. Thousands feared lost in storm. The Guardian Newspaper. Available at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/sep/01/naturaldisasters.hurricanekatrina. Accessed 23 January 2009.Google Scholar
7. Engelthaler, D, Lewis, K, Anderson, S: Vibrio illnesses after Hurricane Katrina. MMWR 2005;54(37):928–931.Google Scholar
8. US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Injury and illness surveillance in hospitals and acute-care facilities after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita—New Orleans area, Louisiana. September 25–October 15, 2005. MMWR 2006;55:35–37.Google Scholar
9. CDC: Surveillance in Hurricane Evacuation Center—Louisiana, September–October 2005. MMWR 2006;55:32–35.Google Scholar
10. CDC: Surveillance for illness and injury after Hurricanes Katrina—Three counties, Mississippi September 5–October 11, 2005. MMWR 2006;55(9):231–234.Google Scholar
11. World Health Organization: Rapid health response, assessment and surveillance after a tsunami, Thailand, 2004–2005. Weekly Epidemiological Record 2005;6:55–60.Google Scholar
12. Lee, LE, Fonseca, V, Brett, KM, et al. : Active morbidity surveillance after Hurricane Andrew—Florida, 1992. JAMA 1993;270:591–594.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Mandl, KD, Overhage, JM, Wagner, MM, et al. : Implementing syndromic surveillance: A practical guide informed by the early experience. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004;11:141–150.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Fleischauer, AT, Silk, BJ, Schumacher, M, et al. : The validity of chief complaint and discharge diagnosis in emergency department-based syndromic surveillance. Acad Emerg Med 2004;11:1262–1267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. CDC: Updated guidelines for evaluating public health surveillance systems: recommendations from the guidelines working group. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5013a1.htm. Accessed 17 April 2006.Google Scholar
16. Buehler, JW, Hopkins, RS, Overhage, JM, et al. : Framework for evaluating public health surveillance systems for early detection of outbreaks: Recommendations from the CDC working group. MMWR 2004;7:1–11.Google Scholar