Reinoso Schiller Nicolás, Usipbekova Karina, Hille Katja, Dreesman Johannes, Schwarz Kjell, Reimers Karin, Feil Fabian, Scheithauer Simone
Department of Infection Control and Infectious Diseases, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Public Health Agency of Lower Saxony (NLGA), Hanover, Germany.
Infect Prev Pract. 2023 Jun 15;5(3):100294. doi: 10.1016/j.infpip.2023.100294. eCollection 2023 Sep.
Locally, the introduction of measures during times of a pandemic emergency is embodied in a pandemic containment plan created by the Robert Koch Institute in 2017. In addition to central indicators such as incidence rates and number of deaths, various indicators are used at the local level to assess the pandemic situation. So far, there hasn't been analyses of the availability and perceived relevance of the surveillance indicators used to manage the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic by the local German pandemic task forces.
This study examined whether local decision-makers had access to surveillance-related indicators in a way that they could be used to make informed decisions in response to the pandemic situation.
A cross sectional study was conducted, using an online questionnaire developed by experts of The Public Health Agency of Lower Saxony and The University Medical Center Göttingen (UMG). All local COVID-19 task forces of the German state of Lower-Saxony were enrolled in the study.
The surveillance indicators assessed by survey respondents as most available and relevant are included under the German Infection Protection Act (IfSG). In contrast, the indicators that are not bound by the IfSG have a significantly lower availability and an inconsistent assessment of relevance.
Against the background of efficiency, it seems central to be able to reliably provide the highly weighted surveillance indicators. Nevertheless, the relevance assessment gap between the indicators embedded in the IfSG and the ones that are not may be explained by cognitive processes such as anchoring bias. The collection and use of indicators to assess the pandemic situation and to evaluate measures should be the subject of continuous multidisciplinary discussions.
在地方层面，大流行紧急时期措施的引入体现在罗伯特·科赫研究所2017年制定的大流行遏制计划中。除了发病率和死亡人数等核心指标外，地方层面还使用各种指标来评估大流行情况。到目前为止，德国地方大流行应对工作组用于管理新冠疫情的监测指标的可用性和感知相关性尚未得到分析。
本研究调查了地方决策者是否能够获取与监测相关的指标，以便他们能够根据大流行情况做出明智的决策。
采用下萨克森州公共卫生机构和哥廷根大学医学中心（UMG）专家开发的在线问卷进行横断面研究。德国下萨克森州所有地方新冠疫情应对工作组都参与了该研究。
调查受访者认为最容易获取且最相关的监测指标包含在德国《感染保护法》（IfSG）中。相比之下，不受IfSG约束的指标可用性明显较低，且相关性评估不一致。
在效率的背景下，能够可靠地提供权重较高的监测指标似乎至关重要。然而，IfSG中包含的指标与未包含的指标之间的相关性评估差距可能可以用锚定偏差等认知过程来解释。收集和使用指标来评估大流行情况并评估措施应该是持续多学科讨论的主题。
