Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 42
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 67(31): 868-871, 2018 Aug 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30091965

RESUMEN

Zika virus infection can occur as a result of mosquitoborne or sexual transmission of the virus. Infection during pregnancy is a cause of fetal brain abnormalities and other serious birth defects (1,2). CDC has updated the interim guidance for men with possible Zika virus exposure who 1) are planning to conceive with their partner, or 2) want to prevent sexual transmission of Zika virus at any time (3). CDC now recommends that men with possible Zika virus exposure who are planning to conceive with their partner wait for at least 3 months after symptom onset (if symptomatic) or their last possible Zika virus exposure (if asymptomatic) before engaging in unprotected sex. CDC now also recommends that for couples who are not trying to conceive, men can consider using condoms or abstaining from sex for at least 3 months after symptom onset (if symptomatic) or their last possible Zika virus exposure (if asymptomatic) to minimize their risk for sexual transmission of Zika virus. All other guidance for Zika virus remains unchanged. The definition of possible Zika virus exposure remains unchanged and includes travel to or residence in an area with risk for Zika virus transmission (https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/page/world-map-areas-with-zika) or sex without a condom with a partner who traveled to or lives in an area with risk for Zika virus transmission. CDC will continue to update recommendations as new information becomes available.


Asunto(s)
Consejo Dirigido , Atención Preconceptiva , Complicaciones Infecciosas del Embarazo/prevención & control , Enfermedades Virales de Transmisión Sexual/prevención & control , Infección por el Virus Zika/prevención & control , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Condones/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Embarazo , Características de la Residencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Viaje/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos , Infección por el Virus Zika/transmisión
3.
J Health Polit Policy Law ; 41(3): 393-421, 2016 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26921384

RESUMEN

Applying qualitative historical methods, we examined the consideration and implementation of school closures as a nonpharmaceutical intervention (NPI) in thirty US cities during the spring 2009 wave of the pA(H1N1) influenza pandemic. We gathered and performed close textual readings of official federal, state, and municipal government documents; media coverage; and academic publications. Lastly, we conducted oral history interviews with public health and education officials in our selected cities. We found that several local health departments pursued school closure plans independent of CDC guidance, that uncertainty of action and the rapidly evolving understanding of pA(H1N1) contributed to tension and pushback from the public, that the media and public perception played a significant role in the response to school closure decisions, and that there were some notable instances of interdepartmental communication breakdown. We conclude that health departments should continue to develop and fine-tune their action plans while also working to develop better communication methods with the public, and work more closely with education officials to better understand the complexities involved in closing schools. Lastly, state and local governments should work to resolve lingering issues of legal authority for school closures in times of public health crises.


Asunto(s)
Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles/historia , Subtipo H1N1 del Virus de la Influenza A , Gripe Humana/historia , Pandemias/historia , Administración en Salud Pública/historia , Instituciones Académicas/historia , Ciudades , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles/métodos , Historia del Siglo XX , Historia del Siglo XXI , Humanos , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Salud Pública
4.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 64(3): 63-6, 2015 Jan 30.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25632954

RESUMEN

Before the current Ebola epidemic in West Africa, there were few documented cases of symptomatic Ebola patients traveling by commercial airline, and no evidence of transmission to passengers or crew members during airline travel. In July 2014 two persons with confirmed Ebola virus infection who were infected early in the Nigeria outbreak traveled by commercial airline while symptomatic, involving a total of four flights (two international flights and two Nigeria domestic flights). It is not clear what symptoms either of these two passengers experienced during flight; however, one collapsed in the airport shortly after landing, and the other was documented to have fever, vomiting, and diarrhea on the day the flight arrived. Neither infected passenger transmitted Ebola to other passengers or crew on these flights. In October 2014, another airline passenger, a U.S. health care worker who had traveled domestically on two commercial flights, was confirmed to have Ebola virus infection. Given that the time of onset of symptoms was uncertain, an Ebola airline contact investigation in the United States was conducted. In total, follow-up was conducted for 268 contacts in nine states, including all 247 passengers from both flights, 12 flight crew members, eight cleaning crew members, and one federal airport worker (81 of these contacts were documented in a report published previously). All contacts were accounted for by state and local jurisdictions and followed until completion of their 21-day incubation periods. No secondary cases of Ebola were identified in this investigation, confirming that transmission of Ebola during commercial air travel did not occur.


Asunto(s)
Aeronaves , Brotes de Enfermedades/prevención & control , Fiebre Hemorrágica Ebola/prevención & control , Práctica de Salud Pública , Viaje , Trazado de Contacto , Personal de Salud , Fiebre Hemorrágica Ebola/epidemiología , Humanos , Nigeria/epidemiología , Enfermedades Profesionales , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
6.
J Public Health Manag Pract ; 19(1): 70-6, 2013.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23169406

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: We assessed local health departments' (LHDs') ability to provide data on nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) for the mitigation of 2009 H1N1 influenza during the pandemic response. DESIGN: Local health departments voluntarily participated weekly in a National Association of County and City Health Officials Web-based survey designed to provide situational awareness to federal partners about NPI recommendations and implementation during the response and to provide insight into the epidemiologic context in which recommendations were made. SETTING: Local health departments during the fall 2009 H1N1 pandemic response. PARTICIPANTS: Local health departments that voluntarily participated in the National Association of County and City Health Officials Sentinel Surveillance Network. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Local health departments were asked to report data on recommendations for and the implementation of NPIs from 7 community sectors. Data were also collected on influenza outbreaks; closures, whether recommended by the local health department or not; absenteeism of students in grades K-12; the type(s) of influenza viruses circulating in the jurisdiction; and the health care system capacity. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-nine LHDs participated. Most LHDs issued NPI recommendations to their community over the 10-week survey period with 70% to 97% of LHDs recommending hand hygiene and cough etiquette and 51% to 78% voluntary isolation of ill patients. However, 21% to 48% of LHDs lacked information of closure, absenteeism, or outbreaks in schools, and 28% to 50% lacked information on outpatient clinic capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Many LHDs were unable to monitor implementation of NPI (recommended by LHD or not) within their community during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. This gap makes it difficult to adjust recommendations or messaging during a public health emergency response. Public health preparedness could be improved by strengthening NPI monitoring capacity.


Asunto(s)
Defensa Civil/organización & administración , Defensa Civil/estadística & datos numéricos , Subtipo H1N1 del Virus de la Influenza A , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gobierno Local , Pandemias/estadística & datos numéricos , Salud Pública , Absentismo , Instituciones de Atención Ambulatoria/estadística & datos numéricos , Higiene de las Manos/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Máscaras/estadística & datos numéricos , Cuarentena/estadística & datos numéricos , Instituciones Académicas/estadística & datos numéricos
7.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 18(7): 1047-53, 2012 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22709566

RESUMEN

Under the current International Health Regulations, 194 states parties are obligated to report potential public health emergencies of international concern to the World Health Organization (WHO) within 72 hours of becoming aware of an event. During July 2007-December 2011, WHO assessed and posted on a secure web portal 222 events from 105 states parties, including 24 events from the United States. Twelve US events involved human influenza caused by a new virus subtype, including the first report of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus, which constitutes the only public health emergency of international concern determined by the WHO director-general to date. Additional US events involved 5 Salmonella spp. outbreaks, botulism, Escherichia coli O157:H7 infections, Guillain-Barré syndrome, contaminated heparin, Lassa fever, an oil spill, and typhoid fever. Rapid information exchange among WHO and member states facilitated by the International Health Regulations leads to better situation awareness of emerging threats and enables a more coordinated and transparent global response.


Asunto(s)
Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles/legislación & jurisprudencia , Enfermedades Transmisibles/epidemiología , Notificación de Enfermedades/legislación & jurisprudencia , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/epidemiología , Contaminación por Petróleo/estadística & datos numéricos , Notificación de Enfermedades/métodos , Humanos , Vigilancia de la Población/métodos , Salud Pública/legislación & jurisprudencia , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Organización Mundial de la Salud
8.
Health Secur ; 15(3): 261-267, 2017.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28636446

RESUMEN

The International Health Regulations (IHR), an international law under the auspices of the World Health Organization (WHO), mandates that countries notify other countries of "travelers under public health observation." Between November 10, 2014, and July 12, 2015, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) made 2,374 notifications to the National IHR Focal Points in 114 foreign countries of travelers who were monitored by US health departments because they had been to an Ebola-affected country in West Africa. Given that countries have preidentified focal points as points of contacts for sharing of public health information, notifications could be made by CDC to a trusted public health recipient in another country within 24 hours of receipt of the traveler's information from a US health department. The majority of US health departments used this process, offered by CDC, to notify other countries of travelers intending to leave the United States while being monitored in their jurisdiction.


Asunto(s)
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Fiebre Hemorrágica Ebola/prevención & control , Vigilancia en Salud Pública , Viaje , África Occidental , Monitoreo Epidemiológico , Fiebre Hemorrágica Ebola/epidemiología , Humanos , Cooperación Internacional , Internacionalidad , Vigilancia de Guardia , Estados Unidos , Organización Mundial de la Salud
9.
MMWR Suppl ; 65(3): 57-67, 2016 Jul 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27390092

RESUMEN

During the 2014-2016 Ebola virus disease (Ebola) epidemic in West Africa, CDC implemented travel and border health measures to prevent international spread of the disease, educate and protect travelers and communities, and minimize disruption of international travel and trade. CDC staff provided in-country technical assistance for exit screening in countries in West Africa with Ebola outbreaks, implemented an enhanced entry risk assessment and management program for travelers at U.S. ports of entry, and disseminated information and guidance for specific groups of travelers and relevant organizations. New and existing partnerships were crucial to the success of this response, including partnerships with international organizations, such as the World Health Organization, the International Organization for Migration, and nongovernment organizations, as well as domestic partnerships with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and state and local health departments. Although difficult to assess, travel and border health measures might have helped control the epidemic's spread in West Africa by deterring or preventing travel by symptomatic or exposed persons and by educating travelers about protecting themselves. Enhanced entry risk assessment at U.S. airports facilitated management of travelers after arrival, including the recommended active monitoring. These measures also reassured airlines, shipping companies, port partners, and travelers that travel was safe and might have helped maintain continued flow of passenger traffic and resources needed for the response to the affected region. Travel and border health measures implemented in the countries with Ebola outbreaks laid the foundation for future reconstruction efforts related to borders and travel, including development of regional surveillance systems, cross-border coordination, and implementation of core capacities at designated official points of entry in accordance with the International Health Regulations (2005). New mechanisms developed during this response to target risk assessment and management of travelers arriving in the United States may enhance future public health responses. The activities summarized in this report would not have been possible without collaboration with many U.S. and international partners (http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/partners.html).


Asunto(s)
Brotes de Enfermedades/prevención & control , Fiebre Hemorrágica Ebola/prevención & control , Internacionalidad , Tamizaje Masivo , Viaje , África Occidental/epidemiología , Aeropuertos , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S./organización & administración , Fiebre Hemorrágica Ebola/epidemiología , Humanos , Cooperación Internacional , Rol Profesional , Medición de Riesgo , Estados Unidos
10.
Vaccine ; 34(49): 5998-6006, 2016 12 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27481360

RESUMEN

Vaccination during pregnancy is increasingly being used as an effective approach for protecting both young infants and their mothers from serious infections. Drawing conclusions from published studies in this area can be difficult because of the inability to compare vaccine trial results across different studies and settings due to the heterogeneity in the definitions of terms used to assess the safety of vaccines in pregnancy and the data collected in such studies. The guidelines proposed in this document have been developed to harmonize safety data collection in all phases of clinical trials of vaccines in pregnant women and apply to data from the mother, fetus and infant. Guidelines on the prioritization of the data to be collected is also provided to allow applicability in various geographic, cultural and resource settings, including high, middle and low-income countries.


Asunto(s)
Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Embarazo , Vacunación/efectos adversos , Vacunas/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Complicaciones Infecciosas del Embarazo/prevención & control , Estadística como Asunto , Vacunas/administración & dosificación
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA