Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T19:21:14.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Enhanced One Health Surveillance during the 58th Presidential Inauguration—District of Columbia, January 2017

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 July 2019

Tiana A. Garrett-Cherry ,
Andrew K. Hennenfent ,
Sasha McGee  and
John Davies-Cole
Tiana A. Garrett-Cherry
Affiliation:
US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response, Division of State and Local Readiness, Field Services Branch, Temporary Epidemiology Field Assignee Program District of Columbia Department of Health, Center for Policy, Planning and Evaluation, Division of Epidemiology–Disease Surveillance and Investigation, Washington, DC
Andrew K. Hennenfent
Affiliation:
District of Columbia Department of Health, Center for Policy, Planning and Evaluation, Division of Epidemiology–Disease Surveillance and Investigation, Washington, DC
Sasha McGee*
Affiliation:
District of Columbia Department of Health, Center for Policy, Planning and Evaluation, Division of Epidemiology–Disease Surveillance and Investigation, Washington, DC
John Davies-Cole
Affiliation:
District of Columbia Department of Health, Center for Policy, Planning and Evaluation, Division of Epidemiology–Disease Surveillance and Investigation, Washington, DC
*
Correspondence and reprint requests to Sasha McGee, District of Columbia Department of Health, 899 North Capitol Street NE, 6th floor, Washington, DC 20002 (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

In January 2017, Washington, DC, hosted the 58th United States presidential inauguration. The DC Department of Health leveraged multiple health surveillance approaches, including syndromic surveillance (human and animal) and medical aid station–based patient tracking, to detect disease and injury associated with this mass gathering.

Methods:

Patient data were collected from a regional syndromic surveillance system, medical aid stations, and an internet-based emergency department reporting system. Animal health data were collected from DC veterinary facilities.

Results:

Of 174 703 chief complaints from human syndromic data, there were 6 inauguration-related alerts. Inauguration attendees who visited aid stations (n = 162) and emergency departments (n = 180) most commonly reported feeling faint/dizzy (n = 29; 17.9%) and pain/cramps (n = 34;18.9%). In animals, of 533 clinical signs reported, most were gastrointestinal (n = 237; 44.5%) and occurred in canines (n = 374; 70.2%). Ten animals that presented dead on arrival were investigated; no significant threats were identified.

Conclusion:

Use of multiple surveillance systems allowed for near-real-time detection and monitoring of disease and injury syndromes in humans and domestic animals potentially associated with inaugural events and in local health care systems.

Keywords

emergency preparednesssyndromic surveillancepatient trackingmass gathering
Type
Original Research
Information
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , April 2020 , pp. 201 - 207
Copyright
© 2019 Society for Disaster Medicine and Public Health, Inc.

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Stark, C. By the Numbers: Presidential Inaugurations. http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/17/politics/btn-presidential-inaugurations/. Published 2013. Accessed January 7, 2017.Google Scholar
Reese, S.National Special Security Events. Washington DC: Congressional Research Service; 2009.Google Scholar
Lombardo, JS, Sniegoski, CA, Loschen, WA, et al. Public health surveillance for mass gatherings. Johns Hopkins APL Tech Dig. 2008;27(4):347-355.Google Scholar
Begier, EM, Sockwell, D, Branch, LM, et al. The national capitol region’s emergency department syndromic surveillance system: do chief complaint and discharge diagnosis yield different results? Emerg Infect Dis. 2003;9(3):393-396.10.3201/eid0903.020363CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lombardo, JS, Burkom, H, Pavlin, J.ESSENCE II and the framework for evaluating syndromic surveillance systems. MMWR Suppl. 2004 Sep 24;53:159-165.Google ScholarPubMed
Lombardo, JS.The ESSENCE II disease surveillance test bed for the national capital area. Johns Hopkins APL Tech Dig. 2003;24(4):327-334.Google Scholar
Burkom, HS, Elbert, YA. Development, adaptation, and assessment of alerting algorithms for biosurveillance. Johns Hopkins APL Tech Dig. 2003;24(4):335-342.Google Scholar
Loschen, W, Seagraves, R, Holtry, R, et al. INFOSHARE–an information sharing tool for public health during the 2009 Presidential Inauguration and H1N1 outbreak. Online J Public Health Inform. 2010;2(3):ojphi.v2i3.3031. doi: 10.5210/ojphi.v2i3.3031CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patel, S.Role of mass gathering surveillance. In: Blazes, D, Lewis, S, eds. Disease Surveillance: Technological Contributions to Global Health Security. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group; 2016:155-179.10.1201/b19506-11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hennenfent, A, DelVento, V, Davies-Cole, J, et al. Expanding Veterinary Biosurveillance in Washington, DC: The Creation and Utilization of an Electronic-Based Online Veterinary Surveillance System. Prev Vet Med. 2017 Mar 1;138:70-78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rabinowitz, P, Gordon, Z, Chudnov, D, et al. Animals as sentinels of bioterrorism agents. Emerg Infect Dis. 2006;12(4):647-652.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thrift, A. Top 10 Vet Visit Reasons for Dogs and Cats. http://www.veterinarypracticenews.com/May-2014/Top-10-Vet-Visit-Reasons-For-Dogs-And-Cats/. Published 2014. Accessed February 7, 2017.Google Scholar
Virbac. Top 10 Reasons Why Pets Go to the Vet. https://todaysveterinarypractice.com/top-10-reasons-why-pets-see-a-veterinarian/. Published 2012. Accessed February 7, 2017.Google Scholar
Milsten, AM, Maguire, BJ, Bissell, RA, et al. Mass-gathering medical care: a review of the literature. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2002;17(3):151-162.10.1017/S1049023X00000388CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arbon, P.Mass-gathering medicine: a review of the evidence and future directions for research. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2007;22(2):131-135.10.1017/S1049023X00004507CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: PDF

Garrett-Cherry et al. supplementary material

Garrett-Cherry et al. supplementary material 1

Download Garrett-Cherry et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 306.7 KB