Miller Jessica, Birnbaum Marvin L
1Waukesha Family Practice, Waukesha,Wisconsin,USA.
2Emeritus Professor of Medicine and Physiology,School of Medicine and Public Health,University of Wisconsin,Madison,Wisconsin,USA.
Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018 Apr;33(2):176-181. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X17007002. Epub 2018 Feb 19.
In October 2010, the Haitian Ministry of Public Health and Population (MSPP; Port au Prince, Haiti) reported a cholera epidemic caused by contamination of the Artibonite River by a United Nation Stabilization Mission camp. Interventional studies of the subsequent responses, including a descriptive Methods section and systematic approach, may be useful in facilitating comparisons and applying lessons learned to future outbreaks. The purpose of this study was to examine publicly available documents relating to the 2010 cholera outbreak to answer: (1) What information is publicly available on interventional studies conducted during the epidemic, and what was/were the impact(s)? and (2) Can the interventions be compared, and what lessons can be learned from their comparison? A PubMed (National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Institutes of Health; Bethesda, Maryland USA) search was conducted using the parameters "Haiti" and "cholera." Studies were categorized as "interventional research," "epidemiological research," or "other." A distinction was made between studies and narrative reports. The PubMed search yielded 171 papers, 59 (34.0%) of which were epidemiological and 12 (7.0%) were interventional studies. The remaining 100 papers (59.0%) comprised largely of narrative, anecdotal descriptions. An expanded examination of publications by the World Health Organization (WHO; Geneva, Switzerland), the Center for Research in the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED; Brussels, Belgium), United States Agency for International Development (USAID; Washington, DC USA)-Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC), and US National Library of Medicine's (NLM; Bethesda, Maryland USA) Disaster Literature databases yielded no additional interventional studies. The unstructured formats and differing levels of detail prohibited comparisons between interventions, even between those with a similar approach. Only two (17.0%) interventional studies included any impact data, although neither commented whether the intervention improved health or reduced incidence or mortality related to cholera. Agreed frameworks for guiding responses and subsequent reporting are needed to ensure reports contain sufficient detail to draw conclusions for the definition of best practices and for the design of future interventions. Miller J , Birnbaum ML . Characterization of interventional studies of the cholera epidemic in Haiti. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018;33(2):176-181.
2010年10月，海地公共卫生与人口部（MSPP；海地太子港）报告称，一场霍乱疫情是由联合国稳定特派团营地污染阿蒂博尼特河所致。对后续应对措施进行干预性研究，包括描述性方法部分和系统方法，可能有助于进行比较，并将吸取的经验教训应用于未来的疫情爆发。本研究的目的是审查与2010年霍乱疫情相关的公开文件，以回答：（1）关于疫情期间进行的干预性研究，有哪些公开信息，其影响是什么？（2）能否对这些干预措施进行比较，从比较中可以吸取哪些教训？使用“海地”和“霍乱”参数在美国国立医学图书馆（美国国立卫生研究院国家生物技术信息中心；美国马里兰州贝塞斯达）的PubMed数据库中进行了检索。研究被分类为“干预性研究”、“流行病学研究”或“其他”。对研究和叙述性报告进行了区分。PubMed检索共得到171篇论文，其中59篇（34.0%）为流行病学研究，12篇（7.0%）为干预性研究。其余100篇论文（59.0%）主要是叙述性、轶事性描述。对世界卫生组织（WHO；瑞士日内瓦）、灾害流行病学研究中心（CRED；比利时布鲁塞尔）、美国国际开发署（USAID；美国华盛顿特区）发展经验交流中心（DEC）以及美国国立医学图书馆（NLM；美国马里兰州贝塞斯达）灾害文献数据库中的出版物进行的扩展检索未发现其他干预性研究。非结构化格式和不同程度的细节使得即使是采用类似方法的干预措施之间也无法进行比较。只有两项（17.0%）干预性研究包含任何影响数据，尽管两者均未提及干预措施是否改善了健康状况或降低了与霍乱相关的发病率或死亡率。需要商定指导应对措施及后续报告的框架，以确保报告包含足够的细节，从而为最佳实践的定义和未来干预措施的设计得出结论。米勒 J，伯恩鲍姆 ML。海地霍乱疫情干预性研究的特征。院前灾难医学。2018；33(2):176 - 181。
