Functions of environmental epidemiology and surveillance in state health departments

Electronic health record case studies to advance environmental public health tracking

Data from traditional public health surveillance systems can have some limitations, e.g., timeliness, geographic level, and amount of data accessible. Electronic health records (EHRs) could present an opportunity to supplement current sources of routinely collected surveillance data. The National Environmental Public Health Tracking Program (Tracking Program) sought to explore the use of EHRs for advancing environmental public health surveillance practices. The Tracking Program funded four state/local health departments to obtain and pilot the use of EHR data to address several issues including the challenges and technical requirements for accessing EHR data, and the core data elements required to integrate EHR data within their departments' Tracking Programs. The results of these pilot projects highlighted the potential of EHR data for public health surveillance of rare diseases that may lack comprehensive registries, and surveillance of prevalent health conditions or risk factors for health outcomes at a finer geographic level. EHRs therefore, may have potential to supplement traditional sources of public health surveillance data.

Data to action: using environmental public health tracking to inform decision making

CONTEXT

Public health surveillance includes dissemination of data and information to those who need it to take action to prevent or control disease. The concept of data to action is explicit in the mission of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) National Environmental Public Health Tracking Program (Tracking Program). The CDC has built a National Environmental Public Health Tracking Network (Tracking Network) to integrate health and environmental data to drive public health action (PHA) to improve communities' health.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the utility of the Tracking Program and Tracking Network in environmental public health practice and policy making.

DESIGN

We analyzed information on how Tracking (all program components hereafter referred to generally as "Tracking") has been used to drive PHAs within funded states and cities (grantees). Two case studies are presented to highlight Tracking's utility.

SETTING

Analyses included all grantees funded between 2005 and 2013.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-seven states, 3 cities, and the District of Columbia ever received funding.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We categorized each PHA reported to determine how grantees became involved, their role, the problems addressed, and the overall action.

RESULTS

Tracking grantees reported 178 PHAs from 2006 to 2013. The most common overall action was "provided information in response to concern" (n = 42), followed by "improved a public health program, intervention, or response plan" (n = 35). Tracking's role was most often either to enhance surveillance (24%) or to analyze data (23%). In 47% of PHAs, the underlying problem was a concern about possible elevated rates of a health outcome, a potential exposure, or a potential association between a hazard and a health outcome. PHAs were started by a request for assistance (48%), in response to an emergency (8%), and though routine work by Tracking programs (43%).

CONCLUSION

Our review shows that the data, expertise, technical infrastructure, and other resources of the Tracking Program and Tracking Network are driving state and local PHAs.