Results from the first 30 months of national sentinel surveillance for influenza in Tanzania, 2008-2010.

Limited data exist on the burden of influenza in developing countries. In 2008, in order to better understand the epidemiology of influenza virus infection in Tanzania, the Tanzanian Ministry of Health and Social Welfare created a sentinel surveillance system for influenza. At 5 hospitals across the country, patients with influenza-like illness (ILI) and severe acute respiratory illness (SARI) had oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal samples collected. At the National Influenza Center in Dar es Salaam, specimens were tested for influenza using real-time polymerase chain reaction tests. From May 2008 through November 2010, a total of 1794 samples were collected from 5 sentinel sites, of which 61% were from patients with ILI and 39% were from patients with SARI. Of all ILI and SARI samples, 8.0% were positive for influenza; 6.9% yielded influenza A virus, and 1.1% yielded influenza B virus. Most influenza A virus was subtype H3, which circulated in nearly every month of 2010. The proportion of influenza-positive cases was similar among ILI (8.5%) and SARI (7.3%) patients (P = .39). In multivariate logistic regression, influenza-positive SARI cases were more likely than influenza-negative SARI cases to have had rhonchi (adjusted OR [aOR], 2.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-4.67), nasal discharge (aOR, 4.57; 95% CI, 1.30-16.10), and stridor (aOR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.17-5.90). Influenza-positive ILI patients had a longer duration of fever on presentation, compared with influenza-negative ILI patients (median, 4 vs 3 days; P = .004). Otherwise, there was no difference in signs or symptoms among influenza-positive and influenza-negative ILI patients. During 2.5 years of surveillance for influenza at 5 geographically disbursed sites in Tanzania, we found that influenza circulated year-round. Surveillance should continue in order to fully understand the seasonality and epidemiology of influenza in Tanzania.

Implementing Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response: Four African countries' experience, 1998-2005.

The Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) strategy was developed by the Africa Regional Office (AFRO) of the World Health Organisation (WHO) and proposed for adoption by member states in 1998. The goal was to build WHO/AFRO countries' capacity to detect, report and effectively respond to priority infectious diseases. This evaluation focuses on the outcomes in four countries that implemented this strategy. Major successes included: integration of the surveillance function of most of the categorical disease control programmes; implementation of standard surveillance, laboratory and response guidelines; improved timeliness and completeness of surveillance data and increased national-level review and use of surveillance data for response. The most challenging aspects were: strengthening laboratory networks; providing regular feedback and supervision on surveillance and response activities; routine monitoring of IDSR activities and extending the strategy to sub-national levels.

Monitoring and evaluation of integrated disease surveillance and response in selected districts in Tanzania.

Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) is a strategy developed by the World Health Organization Regional Office for Africa in 1998. The Ministry of Health, Tanzania has adopted this strategy for strengthening communicable diseases surveillance in the country. In order to improve the effectiveness of the implementation of IDSR monitoring and evaluating the performance of the surveillance system, identifying areas that require strengthening and taking action is important. This paper presents the findings of baseline data collection for the period October-December 2003 in 12 districts representing eight regions of Tanzania. The districts involved were Mbulu, Babati, Dodoma Rural, Mpwapwa, Igunga, Tabora Urban, Mwanza Urban, Muleba, Nkasi, Sumbawanga Rural, Tunduru and Masasi. Results are grouped into three key areas: surveillance reporting, use of surveillance data and management of the IDSR system. In general, reporting systems are weak, both in terms of receiving all reports from all facilities in a timely manner, and in managing those reports at the district level. Routine analysis of surveillance data is not being done at facility or district levels, and districts do not monitor the performance of their surveillance system. There was also good communication and coordination with other sectors in terms of sharing information and resources. It is important that districts' capacity on IDSR is strengthened to enable them monitor and evaluate their own performance using established indicators.

Monitoring and evaluation of Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response in selected districts in Tanzania

Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) is a strategy developed by the World Health Organization. Regional Office for Africa in 1998. The Ministry of Health; Tanzania has adopted this strategy for strengthening communicable diseases surveillance in the country. In order to improve the effectiveness of the implementation of IDSRmonitoring and evaluating the performance of the surveillance system; identifying areas that require strengthening and taking action is important. This paper presents the findings of baseline data collection for the period October - December 2003 in 12 districts representing eight regions of Tanzania. The districts involved were Mbulu; Babati; odoma Rural; Mpwapwa; Igunga; Tabora Urban; Mwanza Urban; Muleba; Nkasi; Sumbawanga Rural; Tunduru and Masasi. Results are grouped into three key areas: surveillance reporting; use of surveillance data and management of the IDSR system. In general; reporting systems are weak; both in terms of receiving all reports from all acilities in a timely manner; and in managing those reports at the district level. Routine analysis of surveillance data is not being done at facility or district levels; and districts do not monitor the performance of their surveillance system. There was also good communication and coordination with other sectors in terms of sharing information and resources. It is important that districts' capacity on IDSR is strengthened to enable them monitor and evaluate their own performance using established indicators