First US Ebola case: Why the delayed diagnosis?

Public health officials remain confident that the first case of Ebola in the US, announced Tuesday, will not spread or become an outbreak. But they acknowledge that case was not diagnosed as soon as it could have been.

John Bazemore/AP
Director of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Tom Frieden speaks during a news conference Tuesday after confirming that a patient in Texas has tested positive for Ebola.

Public health officials remain confident that the first case of Ebola in the United States, announced Tuesday, will not spread or become an outbreak. But they acknowledge that case was not diagnosed as soon as it could have been. 

The man, whose name is not being released and is now receiving treatment, flew from Liberia to Texas on Sept. 20 and was diagnosed with the disease on Sept. 28. But he made his first visit to the hospital on Sept. 26 and was sent home. CNN is reporting that no one at the hospital asked the man if he had traveled recently, despite his symptoms being consistent with Ebola.

Several people who made contact with the patient, including paramedics and emergency room workers, are now under medical observation in Dallas.

The assertion by Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, that “we are stopping this in its tracks” is based on a strong track record. Similar diseases have been introduced in America before and failed to spread, a fact attributed to advanced medical and public health systems. Moreover, the US has already treated four infected US medical professionals, three of them at the Emory University Medical Center in Atlanta. Three of those people are now fine; the fourth remains at the hospital, and his condition has not been updated for several days.

But the apparent oversight in the Texas case is raising questions about whether the US response plan needs to be sharpened further. 

Without addressing the Texas case specifically, Dr. Frieden said hospitals need to be alert for Ebola-like symptoms.

"We know that in busy emergency departments all over the country, people may not ask travel histories," he said on CNN's "New Day." "I don't know if that was done here. But we need to make sure that it is done going forward."

But officials are seeking to calm other public concerns, which they say are unfounded.

According to reports, the man was not tested before departing Liberia, but that was because he showed no symptoms and fell outside the CDC’s protocol to check those who have been in direct contact with the disease.

The CDC also says it is not going to release the man's flight information because "it's just not necessary," a spokesperson told ABC News. The man did not show symptoms until Sept. 24 – four days after the flight – and Ebola isn't communicable unless the person is showing symptoms, Frieden said on CNN.

Meanwhile, Dallas officials acknowledged that the ambulance used to bring the man to Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital was used for another two days. It is now parked in a city parking lot surrounded by red "biohazard" tape. But city spokeswoman Sana Syed told CNN that the ambulance had been decontaminated, as ambulances are after every transport.

Economic and cultural forces are at play in how the disease spreads in impoverished African regions: Lack of sanitary facilities and counterproductive folk remedies and burial customs have aided the virus’s spread.

More broadly, National Institutes of Health officials raised concerns two weeks ago about the impact of budget cuts on epidemic response around the globe. Sequester-related cuts, which amounted to $1.55 billion in 2013, have "eroded our ability to respond,” said NIH representative Anthony Fauci in congressional testimony Sept. 16.

"If even modest investments had been made to build a public health infrastructure in West Africa previously, the current Ebola epidemic could have been detected earlier, and it could have been identified and contained," added Beth Bell, director of the CDC's National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.