IDSR as a platform for implementing IHR in African countries.

Of the 46 countries in the World Health Organization (WHO) African region (AFRO), 43 are implementing Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) guidelines to improve their abilities to detect, confirm, and respond to high-priority communicable and noncommunicable diseases. IDSR provides a framework for strengthening the surveillance, response, and laboratory core capacities required by the revised International Health Regulations [IHR (2005)]. In turn, IHR obligations can serve as a driving force to sustain national commitments to IDSR strategies. The ability to report potential public health events of international concern according to IHR (2005) relies on early warning systems founded in national surveillance capacities. Public health events reported through IDSR to the WHO Emergency Management System in Africa illustrate the growing capacities in African countries to detect, assess, and report infectious and noninfectious threats to public health. The IHR (2005) provide an opportunity to continue strengthening national IDSR systems so they can characterize outbreaks and respond to public health events in the region.

Strengthening systems for communicable disease surveillance: creating a laboratory network in Rwanda.

BACKGROUND: The recent emergence of a novel strain of influenza virus with pandemic potential underscores the need for quality surveillance and laboratory services to contribute to the timely detection and confirmation of public health threats. To provide a framework for strengthening disease surveillance and response capacities in African countries, the World Health Organization Regional Headquarters for Africa (AFRO) developed Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) aimed at improving national surveillance and laboratory systems. IDSR emphasizes the linkage of information provided by public health laboratories to the selection of relevant, appropriate and effective public health responses to disease outbreaks. METHODS: We reviewed the development of Rwanda's National Reference Laboratory (NRL) to understand essential structures involved in creating a national public health laboratory network. We reviewed documents describing the NRL's organization and record of test results, conducted site visits, and interviewed health staff in the Ministry of Health and in partner agencies. Findings were developed by organizing thematic categories and grouping examples within them. We purposefully sought to identify success factors as well as challenges inherent in developing a national public health laboratory system. RESULTS: Among the identified success factors were: a structured governing framework for public health surveillance; political commitment to promote leadership for stronger laboratory capacities in Rwanda; defined roles and responsibilities for each level; coordinated approaches between technical and funding partners; collaboration with external laboratories; and use of performance results in advocacy with national stakeholders. Major challenges involved general infrastructure, human resources, and budgetary constraints. CONCLUSIONS: Rwanda's experience with collaborative partnerships contributed to creation of a functional public health laboratory network.

Modeling the cost-effectiveness of the integrated disease surveillance and response (IDSR) system: meningitis in Burkina Faso.

BACKGROUND: Effective surveillance for infectious diseases is an essential component of public health. There are few studies estimating the cost-effectiveness of starting or improving disease surveillance. We present a cost-effectiveness analysis the Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) strategy in Africa. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: To assess the impact of the IDSR in Africa, we used pre- and post- IDSR meningococcal meningitis surveillance data from Burkina Faso (1996-2002 and 2003-2007). IDSR implementation was correlated with a median reduction of 2 weeks to peak of outbreaks (25(th) percentile 1 week; 75(th) percentile 4 weeks). IDSR was also correlated with a reduction of 43 meningitis cases per 100,000 (25(th)-40: 75(th)-129). Assuming the correlations between reductions in time to peak of outbreaks and cases are related, the cost-effectiveness of IDSR was $23 per case averted (25(th)-$30; 75(th)--cost saving), and $98 per meningitis-related death averted (25(th)-$140: 75(th)--cost saving). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: We cannot absolutely claim that the measured differences were due to IDSR. We believe, however, that it is reasonable to claim that IDSR can improve the cost-effectiveness of public health surveillance.

Trained district health personnel and the performance of integrated disease surveillance in the WHO African region.

BACKGROUND: African countries have intensified in-service training on Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) for district and facility health personnel to strengthen their disease surveillance systems. Eight countries evaluated their experiences and lessons in the implementation of IDSR. METHODOLOGY: We conducted a secondary analysis of the evaluation reports to assess the impact of training of district health personnel on the performance of disease surveillance systems. We developed indicators to assess the potential impact of their training on the timeliness and completeness of reporting, the data analysis of priority diseases at the district and health facility levels and supervision and feedback at the district level FINDINGS: Training approaches implemented included cascade, on-job, pre-service and fast track training on detection, reporting and data analysis. The overall proportion of health facilities with one or two personnel trained varied from 52% to 89% and the knowledge of the health personnel for epidemic-prone diseases ranged from 52% to 78%. All the countries met the threshold of 60% of health personnel in their districts trained in IDSR. The evidence from data analysis at the district level was more than 60% and the timely reporting and completeness of health facilities 70% and 92%, respectively. Supervision of health facilities ranged from 75% to 100%, however feedback was not provided on a regular basis CONCLUSIONS: Trained district personnel are key in the performance of the national IDSR. This review shows that training of district health personnel coupled with sustainable supervision and feedback, reliable communication and availability of simplified reporting tools can contribute to improved performance of national diseases surveillance systems.

Cost analysis of an integrated disease surveillance and response system: case of Burkina Faso, Eritrea, and Mali.

BACKGROUND: Communicable diseases are the leading causes of illness, deaths, and disability in sub-Saharan Africa. To address these threats, countries within the World Health Organization (WHO) African region adopted a regional strategy called Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR). This strategy calls for streamlining resources, tools, and approaches to better detect and respond to the region's priority communicable disease. The purpose of this study was to analyze the incremental costs of establishing and subsequently operating activities for detection and response to the priority diseases under the IDSR. METHODS: We collected cost data for IDSR activities at central, regional, district, and primary health care center levels from Burkina Faso, Eritrea, and Mali, countries where IDSR is being fully implemented. These cost data included personnel, transportation items, office consumable goods, media campaigns, laboratory and response materials and supplies, and annual depreciation of buildings, equipment, and vehicles. RESULTS: Over the period studied (2002-2005), the average cost to implement the IDSR program in Eritrea was $0.16 per capita, $0.04 in Burkina Faso and $0.02 in Mali. In each country, the mean annual cost of IDSR was dependent on the health structure level, ranging from $35,899 to $69,920 at the region level, $10,790 to $13,941 at the district level, and $1,181 to $1,240 at the primary health care center level. The proportions spent on each IDSR activity varied due to demand for special items (e.g., equipment, supplies, drugs and vaccines), service availability, distance, and the epidemiological profile of the country. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the IDSR strategy can be considered a low cost public health system although the benefits have yet to be quantified. These data can also be used in future studies of the cost-effectiveness of IDSR.

Measuring health program effectiveness in the field: an assessment tool.

To assist field workers in program evaluation and to explicitly discuss program strengths and weaknesses, a practical method to estimate the effectiveness of public health interventions within the existing program capacity was developed. The method and materials were tested in seven countries (Afghanistan, Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Uganda, Guatemala, the Philippines, and Ghana). In this method, four core components are assessed using a questionnaire: (1) the efficacy of the intervention; (2) the level of existing human resources (i.e., quality of recruitment, training, and continuing education); (3) the infrastructure (i.e., supplies, salary, transportation, and supervision); and (4) the level of community support (i.e., access and demand). Using the assessment tool provided, program staff can determine if all necessary elements are in place for a successful program that can deliver the specific intervention. Based on the results of the assessment program, weaknesses can be identified, explicitly discussed, and addressed. The usefulness of this tool in humanitarian relief may be twofold: (1) to assess the design and implementation of effective programs; and (2) to highlight the inevitable need for capacity building as the disaster situation evolves.

Information for disasters, information disasters, and disastrous information.

Information is needed to support humanitarian responses in every phase of a disaster. Participants of a multilateral working group convened to examine how best to meet these information needs. Although information systems based on routine reporting of diseases are desirable because they have the potential to identify trends, these systems usually do not deliver on their promise due to inadequate organization and management to support them. To identify organizational and management characteristics likely to be associated with successful information systems in disaster settings, evaluations of the Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) programs in 12 participating countries were reviewed. Characteristics that were mentioned repeatedly in the evaluations as associated with success were grouped into nine categories: (1) human resources management and supervision; (2) political support; (3) strengthened laboratory capacity; (4) communication and feedback (through many mechanisms); (5) infrastructure and resources; (6) system design and capacity; (7) coordination and partnerships with stakeholders; (8) community input; and (9) evaluation. Selected characteristics and issues within each category are discussed. Based on the review of the IDSR evaluations and selected articles in the published literature, recommendations are provided for improving the short- and long-term organization and management of information systems in humanitarian responses associated with disasters. It is suggested that information systems that follow these recommendations are more likely to yield quality information and be sustainable even in disaster settings.

Planning an integrated disease surveillance and response system: a matrix of skills and activities.

BACKGROUND: The threat of a global influenza pandemic and the adoption of the World Health Organization (WHO) International Health Regulations (2005) highlight the value of well-coordinated, functional disease surveillance systems. The resulting demand for timely information challenges public health leaders to design, develop and implement efficient, flexible and comprehensive systems that integrate staff, resources, and information systems to conduct infectious disease surveillance and response. To understand what resources an integrated disease surveillance and response system would require, we analyzed surveillance requirements for 19 priority infectious diseases targeted for an integrated disease surveillance and response strategy in the WHO African region. METHODS: We conducted a systematic task analysis to identify and standardize surveillance objectives, surveillance case definitions, action thresholds, and recommendations for 19 priority infectious diseases. We grouped the findings according to surveillance and response functions and related them to community, health facility, district, national and international levels. RESULTS: The outcome of our analysis is a matrix of generic skills and activities essential for an integrated system. We documented how planners used the matrix to assist in finding gaps in current systems, prioritizing plans of action, clarifying indicators for monitoring progress, and developing instructional goals for applied epidemiology and in-service training programs. CONCLUSION: The matrix for Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) in the African region made clear the linkage between public health surveillance functions and participation across all levels of national health systems. The matrix framework is adaptable to requirements for new programs and strategies. This framework makes explicit the essential tasks and activities that are required for strengthening or expanding existing surveillance systems that will be able to adapt to current and emerging public health threats.