dc.contributor.author |
Schilling, Stefan |
dc.contributor.author |
Fusco, Francesco M. |
dc.contributor.author |
Iaco, Giuseppina De |
dc.contributor.author |
Bannister, Barbara |
dc.contributor.author |
Maltezou, Helena C. |
dc.contributor.author |
Carson, Gail |
dc.contributor.author |
Gottschalk, Rene |
dc.contributor.author |
Brodt, Hans-Reinhard |
dc.contributor.author |
Brouqui, Philippe |
dc.contributor.author |
Puro, Vincenzo |
dc.contributor.author |
Ippolito, Giuseppe |
dc.contributor.author |
European Network for Highly Infectious Diseases project members |
dc.date |
2015-12-14T13:38:40Z |
dc.date |
2015-12-14T13:38:40Z |
dc.date |
2014-10-28 |
dc.date |
2015-12-04T15:27:56Z |
dc.identifier.citation |
1932-6203 |
dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/2445/68437 |
dc.format |
7 p. |
dc.format |
application/pdf |
dc.language.iso |
eng |
dc.publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
dc.relation |
Reproducció del document publicat a: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100401 |
dc.relation |
PloS one, 2014, vol. 9, num. 10, p. e100401 |
dc.relation |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100401 |
dc.rights |
cc by (c) Schilling et al., 2014 |
dc.rights |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
dc.rights |
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/ |
dc.subject |
Malalties infeccioses |
dc.subject |
Unitats de cures intensives |
dc.subject |
Salut pública |
dc.subject |
Communicable diseases |
dc.subject |
Intensive care units |
dc.subject |
Public health |
dc.title |
Isolation facilities for highly infectious diseases in Europe - A cross-sectional analysis in 16 countries |
dc.type |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.description.abstract |
BACKGROUND: Highly Infectious Diseases (HIDs) are (i) easily
transmissible form person to person; (ii) cause a
life-threatening illness with no or few treatment options; and
(iii) pose a threat for both personnel and the public. Hence,
even suspected HID cases should be managed in specialised
facilities minimizing infection risks but allowing
state-of-the-art critical care. Consensus statements on the
operational management of isolation facilities have been
published recently. The study presented was set up to compare
the operational management, resources, and technical equipment
among European isolation facilities. Due to differences in
geography, population density, and national response plans it
was hypothesized that adherence to recommendations will vary.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: Until mid of 2010 the European Network for
Highly Infectious Diseases conducted a cross-sectional analysis
of isolation facilities in Europe, recruiting 48 isolation
facilities in 16 countries. Three checklists were disseminated,
assessing 44 items and 148 specific questions. The median
feedback rate for specific questions was 97.9% (n = 47/48)
(range: n = 7/48 (14.6%) to n = 48/48 (100%). Although all
facilities enrolled were nominated specialised facilities'
serving countries or regions, their design, equipment and
personnel management varied. Eighteen facilities fulfilled the
definition of a High Level Isolation Unit'. In contrast, 24
facilities could not operate independently from their co-located
hospital, and five could not ensure access to equipment
essential for infection control. Data presented are not
representative for the EU in general, as only 16/27 (59.3%) of
all Member States agreed to participate. Another limitation of
this study is the time elapsed between data collection and
publication; e.g. in Germany one additional facility opened in
the meantime. CONCLUSION: There are disparities both within and
between European countries regarding the design and equipment of
isolation facilities. With regard to the International Health
Regulations, terminology, capacities and equipment should be
standardised. |