RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Currently, there is no comprehensive picture of the global surveillance landscape. This survey examines the current state of surveillance systems, levels of integration, barriers and opportunities for the integration of surveillance systems at the country level, and the role of national public health institutes (NPHIs). STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional survey of NPHIs. METHODS: A web-based survey questionnaire was disseminated to 110 NPHIs in 95 countries between July and August 2022. Data were descriptively analysed, stratified by World Health Organization region, World Bank Income Group, and self-reported Integrated Disease Surveillance (IDS) maturity status. RESULTS: Sixty-five NPHIs responded. Systems exist to monitor notifiable diseases and vaccination coverage, but less so for private, pharmaceutical, and food safety sectors. While Ministries of Health usually lead surveillance, in many countries, NPHIs are also involved. Most countries report having partially developed IDS. Surveillance data are frequently inaccessible to the lead public health agency and seldomly integrated into a national public health surveillance system. Common challenges to establishing IDS include information technology system issues, financial constraints, data sharing and ownership limitations, workforce capacity gaps, and data availability. CONCLUSIONS: Public health surveillance systems across the globe, although built on similar principles, are at different levels of maturity but face similar developmental challenges. Leadership, ownership and governance, supporting legal mandates and regulations, as well as adherence to mandates, and enforcement of regulations are critical components of effective surveillance. In many countries, NPHIs play a significant role in integrated disease surveillance.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Integrated disease surveillance (IDS) offers the potential for better use of surveillance data to guide responses to public health threats. However, the extent of IDS implementation worldwide is unknown. This study sought to understand how IDS is operationalized, identify implementation challenges and barriers, and identify opportunities for development. STUDY DESIGN: Synthesis of qualitative studies undertaken in seven countries. METHODS: Thirty-four focus group discussions and 48 key informant interviews were undertaken in Pakistan, Mozambique, Malawi, Uganda, Sweden, Canada, and England, with data collection led by the respective national public health institutes. Data were thematically analysed using a conceptual framework that covered governance, system and structure, core functions, finance and resourcing requirements. Emerging themes were then synthesised across countries for comparisons. RESULTS: None of the countries studied had fully integrated surveillance systems. Surveillance was often fragmented, and the conceptualization of integration varied. Barriers and facilitators identified included: 1) the need for clarity of purpose to guide integration activities; 2) challenges arising from unclear or shared ownership; 3) incompatibility of existing IT systems and surveillance infrastructure; 4) workforce and skills requirements; 5) legal environment to facilitate data sharing between agencies; and 6) resourcing to drive integration. In countries dependent on external funding, the focus on single diseases limited integration and created parallel systems. CONCLUSIONS: A plurality of surveillance systems exists globally with varying levels of maturity. While development of an international framework and standards are urgently needed to guide integration efforts, these must be tailored to country contexts and guided by their overarching purpose.
