Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25350843›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Isolation facilities for highly infectious diseases in Europe--a cross-sectional analysis in 16 countries.

Stefan Schilling, Francesco Maria Fusco, Giuseppina De Iaco, Barbara Bannister, Helena C Maltezou, Gail Carson, Rene Gottschalk, Hans-Reinhard Brodt, Philippe Brouqui, Vincenzo Puro and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Lassa fever: another threat from West Africa.Disaster and military medicine · 2016
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Preparedness for admission of patients with suspected Ebola virus disease in European hospitals: a survey, August-September 2014.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2014
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Stefan SchillingDepartment for Internal Medicine, Staedtische Kliniken Moenchengladbach, Moenchengladbach, Germany.
Francesco Maria FuscoDepartment for Infectious Diseases, National Institute for Infectious Diseases "Lazarro Spallanzani", Rome, Italy.
Giuseppina De IacoDepartment for Internal Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliero, Universitaria Ospedali Riuniti delle Marche, Torrette, Italy.
Barbara BannisterDepartment for Infectious Diseases, The Royal Free Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Helena C MaltezouDepartment for Interventions in Health-Care Facilities, Hellenic Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Athens, Greece.
Gail CarsonDepartment of Rare and Imported Pathogens, Health Protection Agency, Porton, United Kingdom.
Rene GottschalkDepartment for Infectious Diseases, Port Health Authorities, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Hans-Reinhard BrodtDepartment for Infectious Diseases, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Philippe BrouquiDepartment for Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Marseilles University, Marseille, France.
Vincenzo PuroDepartment for Infectious Diseases, National Institute for Infectious Diseases "Lazarro Spallanzani", Rome, Italy.
Giuseppe IppolitoDepartment for Infectious Diseases, National Institute for Infectious Diseases "Lazarro Spallanzani", Rome, Italy.
European Network for Highly Infectious Diseases project members

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHighly 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

findingsUntil 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.

conclusionThere 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.

Indexed as

Communicable Disease ControlHealth FacilitiesInfection ControlPatient IsolationCritical CareCross-Sectional StudiesEuropeHealth ResourcesHealth Services AccessibilityHumansPopulation Surveillance

Identifiers

PMID25350843
PMCPMC4211666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.