AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

AJPH First Look, published online ahead of print Jan 2, 2008
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
AJPH.2006.106138v1
98/2/213    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ghosh, T. S.
Right arrow Articles by Vogt, R. L.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ghosh, T. S.
Right arrow Articles by Vogt, R. L.
Related Collections
Right arrow Other Infections
Right arrow Surveillance
February 2008, Vol 98, No. 2 | American Journal of Public Health 213-215
© 2008 American Public Health Association
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2006.106138

FIELD ACTION REPORT

Active Influenza Surveillance at the Local Level: A Model for Local Health Agencies

Tista S. Ghosh, MD, MPH and Richard L. Vogt, MD

The authors are with Tri-County Health Department, Greenwood Village, Colo.

Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Tista Ghosh, Tri-County Health Department, 7000 E Belleview Ave, Suite 301, Greenwood Village, CO 80111 (e-mail: tghosh{at}tchd.org).

Laboratory-supported, community-based local surveillance systems for influenza can act as early warning systems in identifying the initial entry points of different influenza strains into the community. Unfortunately, local health departments often have limited resources to implement this type of surveillance. We developed and evaluated an active, local influenza surveillance system in 3 metropolitan Denver, Colo, counties that enabled timely case ascertainment and strain identification at little cost. When compared with Colorado’s surveillance system, our system detected cases 7 to 8 weeks earlier than the state’s electronic disease reporting system.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the American Public Health Association