Improvements in malaria surveillance through the electronic Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (eIDSR) system in mainland Tanzania, 2013-2021.

BACKGROUND: Tanzania has made remarkable progress in reducing malaria burden and aims to transition from malaria control to sub-national elimination. In 2013, electronic weekly and monthly reporting platforms using the District Health Information System 2 (DHIS2) were introduced. Weekly reporting was implemented through the mobile phone-based Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (eIDSR) platform and progressively scaled-up from 67 to 7471 (100%) public and private health facilities between 2013 and 2020. This study describes the roll-out and large-scale implementation of eIDSR and compares the consistency between weekly eIDSR and monthly DHIS2 malaria indicator data reporting, including an assessment of its usefulness for malaria outbreak detection and case-based surveillance (CBS) in low transmission areas. METHODS: The indicators included in the analysis were number of patients tested for malaria, number of confirmed malaria cases, and clinical cases (treated presumptively for malaria). The analysis described the time trends of reporting, testing, test positivity, and malaria cases between 2013 and 2021. For both weekly eIDSR and monthly DHIS2 data, comparisons of annual reporting completeness, malaria cases and annualized incidence were performed for 2020 and 2021; additionally, comparisons were stratified by malaria epidemiological strata (parasite prevalence: very low < 1%, low 1 ≤ 5%, moderate 5 ≤ 30%, and high > 30%). RESULTS: Weekly eIDSR reporting completeness steadily improved over time, with completeness being 90.2% in 2020 and 93.9% in 2021; conversely, monthly DHIS2 reporting completeness was 98.9% and 98.7% in 2020 and 2021, respectively. Weekly eIDSR reporting completeness and timeliness were highest in the very low epidemiological stratum. Annualized malaria incidence as reported by weekly eIDSR was 17.5% and 12.4% lower than reported by monthly DHIS2 in 2020 and 2021; for both 2020 and 2021, annualized incidence was similar across weekly and monthly data in the very low stratum. CONCLUSION: The concurrence of annualized weekly eIDSR and monthly DHIS2 reporting completeness, malaria cases and incidence in very low strata suggests that eIDSR could be useful tool for early outbreak detection, and the eIDSR platform could reliably be expanded by adding more indicators and modules for CBS in the very low epidemiological stratum.

Building workforce capacity for effective use of health information systems: Evaluation of a blended eLearning course in Namibia and Tanzania.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health information systems (HIS) are critical components of national health systems, and have been identified as a key element in the development and strengthening of health systems globally. Novel approaches are needed to effectively and efficiently train health care workers on the use of HIS. One such approach is the use of digital eLearning programs, either alone or blended with face-to-face learning activities. METHODS: We developed a novel blended eLearning course based on an in-person HIS training package previously developed by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We then conducted a pilot implementation of the eLearning course in Namibia and Tanzania. RESULTS: The blended eLearning pilot program enrolled 131 people, 72 (55%) from Namibia and 59 (45%) from Tanzania. The majority of enrollees were female (n = 88, 67%) and were nurses (n = 66, 50%). Of the 131 people who participated in the in-person orientation, 95 (73%) completed some or all of the eLearning modules. Across all three modules, the mean score on the post-test was significantly greater than on the pre-test (p < 0.001). When comparing results from previous in-person workshops and the blended eLearning course, we found that participants experienced strong learning gains in both, although learning gains were somewhat greater in the in-person course. Blended eLearning course participants reported good to very good satisfaction with the overall content of the course and with the eLearning modules (3.5 and 3.6 out of 5-point Likert scale). We estimate that the total cost per participant is 2.2-3.4 times greater for the in-person course (estimated cost USD $980) than for the blended eLearning course (estimated cost USD $287-$437). CONCLUSION: A blended eLearning course is an effective method with which to train healthcare workers in the basic features of HIS, and the cost is up to 3.4 times less expensive than for an in-person course with similar content.