Les Étudiants Relais Santé à l'université : objectifs, modalités d'action et d'évaluation.

OBJECTIVES: The development of "Student Health Representatives" (ERS), based on the efficiency of prevention strategies among peers, is encouraged by University Health Services (SSU). And yet, the heterogeneity of the local contexts, as well as the lack of a national referential incites reflections as to the stakes, the key factors, and limits of these schemes. In this way, a national training day was organized to respond to the following objectives: What objective and what framework for student health representatives? Which student health representatives and what actions? What type of evaluation for student health representatives? METHOD: 61 university health service professionals (SSU) (32 nurses, 22 doctors, and 7 prevention specialists), representing 29 university health services met and worked on the question of student health representatives.This work on the ERS followed a process of formalized consensus, based on the Glaser technique (Fink 1984). Two workshops with 30 and 31 people were organized, each divided into three groups (six in total). The distribution of each group was decided beforehand, so that there were no more than two members of the same university health service. Each group worked on the following three points: the role of the ERS, student eligibility and definition of their role, and the evaluation of the ERS.A synthesis was drafted after this work of reflection. RESULTS: An analysis with proposed actions was produced for each of the themes. CONCLUSION: Even though the ERS must be reassessed and harmonized at the national level, the objectives, the framework, the themes, and the preventive action must respond to local health prerogatives, adapted to each university health policy.

[Student health representatives at university: Objectives, modalities, and evaluation]. / Les Étudiants Relais Santé à l'université : objectifs, modalités d'action et d'évaluation.

OBJECTIVES: The development of "Student Health Representatives" (ERS), based on the efficiency of prevention strategies among peers, is encouraged by University Health Services (SSU). And yet, the heterogeneity of the local contexts, as well as the lack of a national referential incites reflections as to the stakes, the key factors, and limits of these schemes. In this way, a national training day was organized to respond to the following objectives: What objective and what framework for student health representatives? Which student health representatives and what actions? What type of evaluation for student health representatives? METHOD: 61 university health service professionals (SSU) (32 nurses, 22 doctors, and 7 prevention specialists), representing 29 university health services met and worked on the question of student health representatives.This work on the ERS followed a process of formalized consensus, based on the Glaser technique (Fink 1984). Two workshops with 30 and 31 people were organized, each divided into three groups (six in total). The distribution of each group was decided beforehand, so that there were no more than two members of the same university health service. Each group worked on the following three points: the role of the ERS, student eligibility and definition of their role, and the evaluation of the ERS.A synthesis was drafted after this work of reflection. RESULTS: An analysis with proposed actions was produced for each of the themes. CONCLUSION: Even though the ERS must be reassessed and harmonized at the national level, the objectives, the framework, the themes, and the preventive action must respond to local health prerogatives, adapted to each university health policy.

Hospital and Population-Based Evidence for COVID-19 Early Circulation in the East of France.

BACKGROUND: Understanding SARS-CoV-2 dynamics and transmission is a serious issue. Its propagation needs to be modeled and controlled. The Alsace region in the East of France has been among the first French COVID-19 clusters in 2020. METHODS: We confront evidence from three independent and retrospective sources: a population-based survey through internet, an analysis of the medical records from hospital emergency care services, and a review of medical biology laboratory data. We also check the role played in virus propagation by a large religious meeting that gathered over 2000 participants from all over France mid-February in Mulhouse. RESULTS: Our results suggest that SARS-CoV-2 was circulating several weeks before the first officially recognized case in Alsace on 26 February 2020 and the sanitary alert on 3 March 2020. The religious gathering seems to have played a role for secondary dissemination of the epidemic in France, but not in creating the local outbreak. CONCLUSIONS: Our results illustrate how the integration of data coming from multiple sources could help trigger an early alarm in the context of an emerging disease. Good information data systems, able to produce earlier alerts, could have avoided a general lockdown in France.