4.2 Article

Use of Digital Pens for Rapid Epidemiologic Data Collection During a Foodborne Outbreak Investigation

Journal

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/dmp.2015.43

Keywords

outbreak response; digital pen; rapid survey; foodborne outbreak; investigation methods; public health preparedness

Funding

  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity for Infectious Diseases [3U50CI000874-02S2, 1U50CK000256-01]
  2. Hospital Preparedness Program and Public Health Emergency Preparedness Cooperative Agreements [5U90TP000535-01]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Public health investigations require rapid assessment, response, and initiation of control measures. In 2012, the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services used digital pens to rapidly acquire epidemiologic data during a gastrointestinal illness outbreak. Methods: Menus were obtained and a standard questionnaire was administered to exposed persons using digital pens. Questionnaire data were downloaded into an electronic file for analysis. Results: Sixty-nine (74%) of 93 exposed persons completed a questionnaire. Of 6389 data entries made on digital paper, 218 (3%) required correction; of these, 201 (92%) involved a free-form variable and 17 (8%) involved a check-box variable. Digital pens saved an estimated 5 to 6 hours of data-entry time. Conclusions: This outbreak provided an opportunity to assess the value of digital pens for decreasing data-entry burden and allowing more timely data analysis in an emergent setting. Depending on the size of the outbreak and complexity of the survey, there is likely a threshold when use of digital pens would provide a clear benefit to outbreak response. As new technology becomes available for use in emergency preparedness settings, public health agencies must continuously review and update response plans and evaluate investigation tools to ensure timely disease control and response activities.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available