Skip to main content
. 2014 Apr 26;7:201. doi: 10.1186/1756-3305-7-201

Table 3.

Comparison of the estimated workload, applying ECDC workload rates and formulas, and the actual workload of the ExoSurv project presented by category of personnel (workload in working days)

 
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Scenario 1 + 2
 
ECDC 1
ExoSurv 2
ECDC 1
ExoSurv 2
ECDC 1
ExoSurv 2
            Total Post-doc Technician
Field investigations
101
41
20
41
121
82
24
58
Laboratory investigations 3
13
26
67
22
80
48
35
13
Data processing
4
7
35
12
39
19
11
8
Communication/dissemination
4
22
31
44
35
66
41
25
Total surveillance workload
122
96
153
119
275
215
111
104
Preparatory phase
 
33
 
13
 
46
21
25
Total workload
 
129
 
132
 
261
132
129
Available wd 2012
 
 
 
 
 
242
121
121
Extra wd 2012           19 11 8

1Four months surveillance, including communication and dissemination, excluding preparatory phase (following scenario 1 & 2, without adjustment for trap density).

2One month preparation (Jun-Jul, preparatory phase), four months surveillance (Jul-Oct) and two months communication and dissemination (Nov-Dec).

3Workload for laboratory investigations was divided between scenario 1 & 2 based on the number of tubes with adults and larvae, and of polystyrene pieces checked (PoE = 54%, IMS-colonised areas = 46%).