Partners in Sentinel Health Surveillance 2003-2004 TARRANT Annual Meeting February 24, 2005

1. Partners in Sentinel Health Surveillance2003-2004TARRANT Annual MeetingFebruary 24, 2005 National Research System (NaReS) Staff Jamie Jensen - FluWatch Coordinator Anita Lambert-Lanning - Research Information Coordinator (NaReS)

2. NaReS FluWatch Sentinel Provinces LA/ I http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/pphb-dgspsp/fluwatch/index.html

3. Provided by Jeannette Macey 2002

4. NaReS FluWatch Recruitment Procedures • Welcome packages faxed out in September • Extra sentinels recruited (faxing recruitment packages / phone calling) in CDs as needed using expected rate of 1 sentinel per 250,000 population • Recruitment process labour intensive in fall but now continues year round for new and replacement recruits

5. Sample Fluwatch Reporting Form See additional handout \\cfpcfile\cfpc\research\Anita\reporting form.pdf

6. holidays April blip?

8. Participation Rates by Province 2003-04

9. Data Collection ProcessEvaluation Surveys • NaReS FluWatch Sentinels (n=158) were sent an Evaluation Questionnaire in Mar 2004 • 7 requested discontinuation throughout year • French speaking sentinels received evaluation form in French if indicated • Response Rates to Evaluation=138/158 (87%)

10. Evaluation of Participation # n=138 % Agree Amt of time spent completing Forms was < 15 minutes 105 76.1 Amt of time required for participation was acceptable 136 98.6 Instructions clear & easy to follow 138 100.0 Weekly reporting forms easy to complete 136 98.6 Recv’d weekly forms on timely basis 132 95.7

11. Evaluation of Participation # n=138 % Agree Faxing reports did not present any problems 132 95.7 Amt of detail requested was acceptable 136 98.6 Frequency of ILI (weekly) was acceptable 132 95.7 Interested in participating for other conditions on an ad hoc 100 72.5

12. Received FluWatch reports each week frequency percent Yes 80 58.0 No No answer 57 1 41.3 0.7 Total 138 100.0

14. Taking clinical samples #

15. Type of Clinical Samples Taken (n=50 sentinels with more than one choice in some cases) #

17. Practice Profile of Sentinels *N.B. 4 mainly female patients, 1 in emergency, 1 focused on seniors

18. Practice Profile of Sentinels

19. Practice Profile of Sentinels

21. Patient Visits among sentinels(n=138) 81/138 (58.7%) report up to 20% Of their patient visits are walk-ins #

22. Conclusions / Recommendations • spring of 2004 Health Canada decided to continue faxing reporting forms weekly for summer months • large drop in sentinels agreeing to participate over the summer months was expected & did occur but not to the level of previous summers • done on assumption that asking would underscore need for regularization of year-round surveillance • year-round surveillance among NaRes Sentinels continues to rise to a limited extent (55%) in 2004 • 36.2% of 2003-04 surveyed sentinels still prefer to report ONLY during the regular season • SARS and Avian virus threats may have heightened sentinel commitment necessary for year round reporting but additional CME promotion and effort is still required

23. Attendees committed but concerned re: Need for expansion Lack of time Compensation for surveillance work in primary care Need for combining clinical & research updates in 1 CME session Researchers would like _ to find an RFP to support the testing/analysis of networked surveillance data from GP/FP practices _ Link surveillance to E-data capture methods to provide more timely feedback to sentinel physicians re: their own collective lab reports etc. Toronto 2004 FMF Influenza Workshop

24. Attendees surveyed at the FMF workshop in Toronto confirmed that being a FluWatch sentinel kept them in the influenza information loop. They are concerned about new and emerging diseases as demonstrated by a comment from Dr. Peter McKean (PEI sentinel) “I feel that it (sentinel surveillance) is of essential importance to public health.” This concern was underscored by the fact that greater than half of the participants at the workshop do surveillance year round.