Assessment of the core and support functions of the Integrated Disease Surveillance system in Maharashtra, India

Monitoring the progress of the Integrated Disease Surveillance (IDS) strategy is an important component to ensure its sustainability in the state of Maharashtra in India. The purpose of the study was to document the baseline performance of the system on its core and support functions and to understa...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMC public health 2013-06, Vol.13 (1), p.575-575, Article 575
Hauptverfasser: Phalkey, Revati K, Shukla, Sharvari, Shardul, Savita, Ashtekar, Nutan, Valsa, Sapna, Awate, Pradip, Marx, Michael
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Monitoring the progress of the Integrated Disease Surveillance (IDS) strategy is an important component to ensure its sustainability in the state of Maharashtra in India. The purpose of the study was to document the baseline performance of the system on its core and support functions and to understand the challenges for its transition from an externally funded "project" to a state owned surveillance "program". Multi-centre, retrospective cross-sectional evaluation study to assess the structure, core and support surveillance functions using modified WHO generic questionnaires. All 34 districts in the state and randomly identified 46 facilities and 25 labs were included in the study. Case definitions were rarely used at the periphery. Limited laboratory capacity at all levels compromised case and outbreak confirmation. Only 53% districts could confirm all priority diseases. Stool sample processing was the weakest at the periphery. Availability of transport media, trained staff, and rapid diagnostic tests were main challenges at the periphery. Data analysis was weak at both district and facility levels. Outbreak thresholds were better understood at facility level (59%) than at the district (18%). None of the outbreak indicator targets were met and submission of final outbreak report was the weakest. Feedback and training was significantly better (p 
ISSN:1471-2458
1471-2458
DOI:10.1186/1471-2458-13-575