An inaugural forum on epidemiological modeling for public health stakeholders in Arizona.

Epidemiological models-which help us understand and forecast the spread of infectious disease-can be valuable tools for public health. However, barriers exist that can make it difficult to employ epidemiological models routinely within the repertoire of public health planning. These barriers include technical challenges associated with constructing the models, challenges in obtaining appropriate data for model parameterization, and problems with clear communication of modeling outputs and uncertainty. To learn about the unique barriers and opportunities within the state of Arizona, we gathered a diverse set of 48 public health stakeholders for a day-and-a-half forum. Our research group was motivated specifically by our work building software for public health-relevant modeling and by our earnest desire to collaborate closely with stakeholders to ensure that our software tools are practical and useful in the face of evolving public health needs. Here we outline the planning and structure of the forum, and we highlight as a case study some of the lessons learned from breakout discussions. While unique barriers exist for implementing modeling for public health, there is also keen interest in doing so across diverse sectors of State and Local government, although issues of equal and fair access to modeling knowledge and technologies remain key issues for future development. We found this forum to be useful for building relationships and informing our software development, and we plan to continue such meetings annually to create a continual feedback loop between academic molders and public health practitioners.

Assessing the Capacity of the US Health Care System to Use Additional Mechanical Ventilators During a Large-Scale Public Health Emergency.

OBJECTIVE: A large-scale public health emergency, such as a severe influenza pandemic, can generate large numbers of critically ill patients in a short time. We modeled the number of mechanical ventilators that could be used in addition to the number of hospital-based ventilators currently in use. METHODS: We identified key components of the health care system needed to deliver ventilation therapy, quantified the maximum number of additional ventilators that each key component could support at various capacity levels (ie, conventional, contingency, and crisis), and determined the constraining key component at each capacity level. RESULTS: Our study results showed that US hospitals could absorb between 26,200 and 56,300 additional ventilators at the peak of a national influenza pandemic outbreak with robust pre-pandemic planning. CONCLUSIONS: The current US health care system may have limited capacity to use additional mechanical ventilators during a large-scale public health emergency. Emergency planners need to understand their health care systems' capability to absorb additional resources and expand care. This methodology could be adapted by emergency planners to determine stockpiling goals for critical resources or to identify alternatives to manage overwhelming critical care need.