20910 Comparing State/Jurisdiction Case Reporting Practices with Recommendations From the CDC/CSTE Case Report Standardization Workgroup (CRSWg)

Sunday, August 30, 2009
Grand Hall/Exhibit Hall
Victoria L. Phillips, DPhil , Emory University, Atlanta, GA
John Abellera, MPH , National Center for Public Health Informatics, Division of Integrated Surveillance Systems and Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA
Jane Whipple, MPH , NCPHI, McKing Consulting, Atlanta, GA
Background: Public health case reporting (PHCR) is required by law or regulation at both state and sub-state jurisdictional levels.  Current challenges to PHCR include: differences and deficits in information technology (IT) infrastructure, agreement about key reporting items, when to report and to whom, and knowledge about existing reporting regulations.  Many states have PHCR criteria by law or statue, but others do not.
The Case Report Standardization Workgroup (CRSWg) was formed by CDC’s National Center for Public Health Informatics (NCPHI) and CSTE in March, 2007 to promote PHCR.  The CRSWg has identified a list of common core data elements for PHCR by compiling and analyzing multiple states’ reportable condition forms and released recommendations for common core data elements for PHCR in April 2009.  The CRSWg proposed that data elements in five key areas be included: reporting information and reporter contact information, health care provider information, facility/provider contact information, subject information, and clinical information. 
Methodology: CDC conducted an extensive web analysis of 54 states and jurisdictions for 1) existence of state or sub-state jurisdiction law or statue pertaining to PHCR requirements and 2) comparison of state or sub-state jurisdiction common core data elements to those recommended by CRSWg. 
Results: Of 54 state/jurisdictions, 33 had laws citing required reporting of the data elements; 14 had data elements that could be extracted from their Case Morbidity Report (CMR) and seven had no data elements specified.  From 18 common data elements, 17 are required by more than 50% of states/jurisdictions. 
Conclusion: Understanding the current status of common core data elements in PHCR is important to advance standardization and, potentially, alignment with the common core data elements recommended by the CRSWg.  Also, identifying the states/jurisdictions currently in alignment can help provide a basis for best practices to guide adoption of common core data elements for PHCR.
See more of: Posters
See more of: Submissions