Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T02:38:18.986Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Poison Control Centers' Role in Glow Product-Related Outbreak Detection: Implications for Comprehensive Surveillance System

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Alvin F. Chu ,
Steven M. Marcus  and
Bruce Ruck
Alvin F. Chu*
Affiliation:
New Jersey Poison Information and Education System
Steven M. Marcus
Affiliation:
New Jersey Poison Information and Education System Department of Preventive Medicine and Community Health/Department of Pediatrics, New Jersey Medical School, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey
Bruce Ruck
Affiliation:
New Jersey Poison Information and Education System
*
New Jersey Poison Information and Education System140 Bergen StreetNewark, New Jersey 07101-1709USA E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction:

The development of syndromic surveillance systems to detect bioterrorist attacks and emerging infectious diseases has become an important and challenging goal to many governmental agencies and healthcare authorities. This study utilized the sharp increase of glow product-related calls to demonstrate the utility of poison ontrol data for early detection of potential outbreaks during the week of Halloween in 2007.

Methods:

A review was conducted of the electronic records of exposures reported to the New Jersey Poison Information and Education System NJPIES) Poison Control Hotline from 2002 through 2007 with generic code number 0201027 (glow products) set by the American Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC). Key information such as age, gender, time of the call, exposure reason, clinical effects, and medical outcomes along with telephone number, zip code, and county location were used in the analyses to determine the extent of the outbreak.

Results:

Analyses included a total of 139 glow product-related calls during the week of Halloween in 2007 with a single-day high of 59 calls on Halloween Day. More than 90% of the glow product exposures were in children 1–10 years of age. The glow product-related calls on Halloween Day increased from 14 calls in 2002 to 59 calls in 2007, a 321% increase during a six-year period.

Conclusions:

Poison control centers in the United States are equipped with a unique and uniform input data collection system—the National Poison Data System—that provides an important data source in the development of a comprehensive surveillance system for early outbreak detection.

Keywords

early detectionglow productsHalloweenNational Poison Data System (NPDS)New Jersey Poison Information and Education System (NJPIES)outbreakspoison control centerssyndromic surveillance system
Type
Brief Report
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , February 2009 , pp. 68 - 72
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.)

References

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Updated guidelines for evaluating public health surveillance system: recommendations from the guidelines working group.MMWR 2001:50(No.RR-13)Google Scholar
2. Broome, CV: Overview, policy, and systems—Federal role in early detection preparedness systems. MMWR 2005:54(Suppl);7–9Google Scholar
3. Travers, D, Barnett, C, Ising, A, Waller, A: Timeliness of emergency department diagnoses for syndromic surveillance. Proc AMIA Symp 2006;769–773.Google ScholarPubMed
4. Begier, EM, Sockwell, D, Branch, LM, Davies-Cole, JO, Jones, LH, Edwards, L, Casani, JA, Blythe, D: The National Capitol Region's Emergency Department Syndromic Surveillance System: Do chief complaint and discharge diagnosis yield different results? Emerg Infect Dis March 2003. [cited 2007 Nov 5]. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol9no3/02-0363.htm.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Mostashari, F, Fine, A, Das, D, Adams, J, Layton, M: Use of ambulance dispatch data as an early warning system for communitywide influenza like illness, New York City. J Urban Health 2003;80(2, suppl 1):i57–i65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Heffernan, R, Mostashari, F, Das, D, Besculides, M, Rodriguez, C, Greenko, J, Steiner-Sichel, L, Balter, S, Karpati, A, Thomas, P, Phillips, M, Ackelsberg, J, Lee, E, Leng, J, Hartman, J, Metzger, K, Rosselli, R, Weiss, D: System descriptions New York City syndromic surveillance systems. MMWR 2004:53(Suppl);23–27.Google Scholar
7. Newton, E. Video and click-stream data as surveillance tools. Presented at: the first national syndromic surveillance conference, 23–24 September 2002; New York, NY.Google Scholar
8. Marcus, S, Chafee-Bahamon, C, Arnold, V, Lovejoy, F: A regional poison control system. Effect on response to hypothetical poisoning. Am J Dis Child 1984;138:1010–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Kelly, N, Ellis, M, Kirkland, R, Holmes, S Kozinetz, C: Effectiveness of a poison center impact on medical facility visits. Vet Human Toxocol 1997;39:44–48.Google ScholarPubMed
10. Philips, K, Homan, R, Hiatt, P, Luft, H, Kearney, T, Heard, S, Olson, K: The costs and outcomes of restricting public access to poison control centers. Results from a natural experiment. Med Care 1998;36:271–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Derby, MP, McNally, J, Ranger-Moore, J, Hulette, L, Villar, R, Hysong, T, MacNeill, E, Lebowitz, M, Burgess, J: Poison control center—Based syndromic surveillance for foodborne illness. MMWR 2005:54(Suppl);35–40.Google ScholarPubMed
12. Foldy, SL: Linking better surveillance to better outcomes. MMWR 2004:53(Suppl);12–17.Google ScholarPubMed