Injury Surveillance Workgroup Conference Call (Workgroup 2, Meeting #5)

Injury Surveillance Workgroup Conference Call (Workgroup 2, Meeting #5)

September 21, 2012

Call Attendees:

·  Organizers/administrators:

o  Marguerite Carroll (Falmouth Institute, Project Manager)

o  Basla Andolsun (Falmouth Institute, Curriculum Development)

·  Workgroup members:

o  Ward Jones

o  Jon Peabody

o  Jaylene Wheeler

Agenda :

1.  Objective #5

a.  Page 15, 1.1

i.  Denominator figure is usually an estimate. It’s hard to get accurate population data. Can use most recent census data.

ii. First sentence in 1.1 is not needed.

iii.  Simplify language. Say what a rate is, understand it, calculate a basic one, and finish.

iv.  Marguerite: If this is covered sufficiently in IHS slides, maybe we can just use those and add any language from manual as needed.

1.  Agreed.

2.  Speaker would cover denominator information when presenting the slide. It is OK to leave out manual text.

3.  No need to spell it out word for word.

b.  Page 16

i.  Needs to be way simplified.

ii. Discuss that denominators can be different. E.g., crashes for landings and take-offs, etc., not just number of cases/population and not just people.

iii.  Must of this is FYI only. Statistician should be handling it—call your area injury prevention specialist.

c.  Page 17

i.  “Calculate Crude Rates for Injury Deaths” already covered elsewhere.

d.  Page 19

i.  Remove.

e.  Page 20

i.  Covered already. Only thing is that data analysis and interpretation exercise is based on this. ( IHS exercise, not CDC one.)

ii. As long as it’s addressed that you separate into ages and then risks, you don’t have to do all the calculations.

iii.  As long as the numerator and denominator are covering the same thing, they’re ok.

iv.  Data Analysis and Interpretation exercise – OK to include IF there is time. We can put it at the end as reference material.

f.  Page 22

i.  Specific rates by age group

1.  Use data from AI/AN.

2.  Include in book, but doesn’t have to be covered if instructor doesn’t want to.

g.  Page 23

i.  Same as per million vehicle miles, suicide rates, etc. Should hear about it, but it’s very complicated. Should have statistician do it. However, talk about why you would want to have age adjusted rate.

h.  Page 24

i.  Calculate Years of Potential Life Lost – This is crucial.

1.  Example: Saying you lost over 1,000 years of life hits people harder than saying you lost x lives.

i.  Page 25

i.  Age in expected life of your population is best to do. AI/ANs have shorter life expectancy.

ii. Instructor can talk about variation with populations.

j.  Page 26-28

i.  Remove chart and steps.

ii. Slide only is OK. Instructor can add any necessary points here.

iii.  Bottom: Mapping has value.

1.  Ward uses pin maps in his offices. Even simple, hand-done maps are helpful.

2.  Q: Include each type of map?

a.  Don’t go over in detail other than spot map, but do mention. Example: CDC maps of the states are good examples.

k.  Page 29

i.  Something like this is OK to show concept, but less busy (simpler) and from I.C.

l.  Page 30

i.  “Plan to Disseminate and Communicate Results” – Important topic to cover.

ii. Surveillance only does good if you communicate results to appropriate parties. Who to get it to varies by location: villages, US tribal councils, localized US greater tribal governments, etc.

iii.  Get information out to whoever decision-makers are and also to those who provide services so they can tailor services to address issues, e.g., citizen’s group.

iv.  Whoever is presenting topic should say: figure out who the players are locally and get information to them. Or, better yet, say coalition—this builds consistency with what we discussed in L1/L2.

v. Some groups have privacy issues and need approval before disseminating results.

vi.  Emphasis on tribal review and approval process. Put this before dissemination to reiterate why it is important.

vii.  Marguerite: Add this to the five steps here as an early step?

1.  Yes, good idea.

viii.  Remember to not get sidetracked. The reason we do it through P.H. model is so you can figure out how to build intervention based on what problems are. Part of it may be publicity.

m.  Page 33

i.  This is where interpretation aspect of analysis becomes very important when you’re getting information out.

ii. Need to give context for what it means, not just give numbers.

iii.  Discuss this and how low numbers and low population can skew things up or down even when you’re well within structured deviation.

n.  Page 34

i.  Outline – Offer this as list of things to consider, but there is no need to do each every time.

o.  Page 34, 4.1.1

i.  Rephrase some of this.

1.  Example: We don’t have D.A.s per se, we have tribal prosecutors.

2.  We don’t have forensic medicine offices - variation by location.

ii. If you were setting up a surveillance system and write a big plan before you started, you’ll get wrapped up in bureaucracy.

p.  Page 35, 4.1.2

i.  Ok as long as menu of things to consider. What works locally varies.

q.  Page 35 exercise

i.  Worth including at the discretion of instructor.

ii. No right or wrong answers—varies by location. May help demonstrate local variability by getting participants responses in class.

2.  Next meeting Friday, Sept 28 1:00 EDT

a.  Will review

1. CDC Objective 7
2. Data analysis we’ve already done
3. Social marketing and advocacy (please take a look and see if it is appropriate to discuss)

To Do:

All: Next meeting is September 28, 2012, 1:00-2:00pm EDT

Injury Surveillance Conference Call Summary (Workgroup 2, fifth meeting)

9/21/12