Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 21, Number 7—July 2015
Research

Assessment of Arbovirus Surveillance 13 Years after Introduction of West Nile Virus, United States1

James L. HadlerComments to Author , Dhara Patel, Roger S. Nasci, Lyle R. Petersen, James M. Hughes, Kristy Bradley, Paul Etkind, Lilly Kan, and Jeffrey Engel
Author affiliations: Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut, USA (J.L. Hadler); Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists, Atlanta, Georgia, USA (D. Patel, J. Engel); Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA (R.S. Nasci, L.R. Petersen); Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta (J.M. Hughes); Oklahoma State Department of Health, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA (K. Bradley); National Association of County and City Health Officials, Washington, DC, USA (P. Etkind, L. Kan)

Main Article

Table 1

States conducting selected West Nile virus surveillance activities, United States, 2004 and 2012*

Surveillance activity No. responding states (% with activity)
% Difference from 2004 to 2012
2012 2004
Human surveillance
Formal surveillance system 50 (98) 49 (100) −2
Active surveillance component 49 (29) 49 (47) −18
Use official case definition 50 (88) 49 (88) 0
Require reporting of encephalitis of unknown etiology
50 (48)
49 (63)
−15
To encourage reporting and to suggest a high index of suspicion, did you contact
Neurologists 48 (50) 48 (60) −10
Critical care specialists 48 (48) 49 (57) −9
Infectious disease specialists
48 (58)
49 (82)
−24
Equine surveillance
Formal surveillance system 49 (90) 49 (94) −4
Active surveillance component
44 (5)
46 (24)
−19
Designated public health veterinarian within the agency?
Yes
50 (76)
49 (82)
−6
Avian surveillance
Formal avian death surveillance 49 (39) 49 (98) −59
Active component 19 (10) 48 (44) −34
Sentinel chicken surveillance 50 (10) NA
Adequate access to wildlife expertise within agency
50 (76)
49 (92)
−16
Mosquito surveillance
Formal surveillance system
49 (80)
49 (96)
−16
Collect information about mosquito surveillance from LHDs in state? (states only)
Yes 49 (90) 49 (94) −4
By species?
43 (86)
45 (80)
+6
Do most LHDs in your state conduct surveillance for (states only)
Adult mosquitoes 44 (34) 44 (48) −14
Larval mosquitoes 44 (18) 44 (30) −11
Adequate access to entomologist in agency or by contract 50 (64) 49 (71) −7

*–, not asked; NA, not applicable; asked; LHDs, local health departments.

Main Article

1A shorter version of this report has been published previously (1).

Page created: June 12, 2015
Page updated: June 12, 2015
Page reviewed: June 12, 2015
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external