Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T11:04:32.406Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Use of Interactive Voice Response Technology by Poison Centers during the H1N1 Outbreak

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Mathias B. Forrester ,
John F. Villanacci  and
Norma Valle
Mathias B. Forrester*
Affiliation:
Department of State Health Services, Austin, Texas, USA
John F. Villanacci
Affiliation:
Department of State Health Services, Austin, Texas, USA
Norma Valle
Affiliation:
Commission on State Emergency Communications, Austin, Texas, USA
*
Mail Code 1964 Room T-704.12, Environmental Epidemiology and Disease Registries Section, Texas Department of State Health Services, PO Box 149347, Austin, Texas 78714-9347 USA, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction:

Interactive voice response (IVR) technology may facilitate poison centers to handle increased call volumes that may occur during public health emergencies. On 28 April 2009, the Texas Poison Center Network (TPCN) added a H1N1 message in English and Spanish to its IVR system. This study tested whether IVR technology could be used to assist Texas poison centers during the H1N1 outbreak.

Methods:

The distribution of callers who accessed the H1N1 message during 29 April–31 May 2009 was determined with respect to message language, subsequent caller action, and date of the call.

Results:

The H1N1 message was accessed by 1,142 callers, of whom, 92.9% listened to the message in English, and 7.1% listened to the message in Spanish. After listening to the message, 33.3% hung up while 66.7% spoke to a poison center agent. The number of callers who accessed the message was highest on 29 April 2009 and then declined.

Conclusions:

Interactive voice response technology can be used to assist poison centers to provide information and handle calls from the public during a public health emergency.

Keywords

communicationH1N1 influenzainteractive voice response technologylanguagepoison center
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 25 , Issue 5 , October 2010 , pp. 415 - 418
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2010

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.Krenzelok, EP, Mrvos, R: The use of an automated interactive voice response system to manage medication identification calls to a poison center. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 2009;47(5):425–429.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Krenzelok, EP: Strategies to improve poison center efficiency and to reduce workload. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 2009;47(5):469–470.Google Scholar
3.Bronstein, AC, Creavin, MB, Spyker, DA, Seroka, AM, Banerji, S, Wruk, KM: Automation of drug identification using interactive voice response technology. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 2007;45:607.Google Scholar
4.Bronstein, AC, Banerji, S, Seroka, AM, Wruk, KM, Neil, RM: Interactive voice response system for automated drug identification. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 2005;43:685–686.Google Scholar
5.Bogdan, GM, Seroka, AM, Scherger, D, Volkman, T: Use of an interactive response (IR) system in handling the increased demands of public health emergencies. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 2007;45:621.Google Scholar
6.Woodard Jenkins, JA, Woolf, A: Automative answering systems: Good or bad for poison centers? J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 1998;36:481.Google Scholar
7.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Update: Swine influenza A (H1N1) infections—California and Texas, April 2009. MMWR 2009;58(16):435–437.Google Scholar
8.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Outbreak of swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) virus infection—Mexico, March-April 2009. MMWR 2009;58(16):467–470.Google Scholar
9.Swine flu: Two of 7 cases found in Texas. Houston Chronicle 24 April 2009: A8.Google Scholar
10.Forrester, MB: Investigation of Texas poison center calls regarding a chlorine gas release: Implications for terrorist attack toxicosurveillance. Tex Med 2006;102(5): 52–57.Google ScholarPubMed
11.Forrester, MB: Poison control center calls relating to Salmonella serotype Saintpaul outbreak in April-August 2008. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 2009;47:725.Google Scholar