An evaluation of the Zambia influenza sentinel surveillance system, 2011–2017
Abstract Background Over the past decade, influenza surveillance has been established in several African countries including Zambia. However, information on the on data quality and reliability of established influenza surveillance systems in Africa are limited. Such information would enable countrie...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2020-01-01
|
| Series: | BMC Health Services Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4884-5 |
| _version_ | 1818429835176837120 |
|---|---|
| author | Paul Simusika Stefano Tempia Edward Chentulo Lauren Polansky Mazyanga Lucy Mazaba Idah Ndumba Quinn K. Mbewe Mwaka Monze |
| author_facet | Paul Simusika Stefano Tempia Edward Chentulo Lauren Polansky Mazyanga Lucy Mazaba Idah Ndumba Quinn K. Mbewe Mwaka Monze |
| author_sort | Paul Simusika |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Over the past decade, influenza surveillance has been established in several African countries including Zambia. However, information on the on data quality and reliability of established influenza surveillance systems in Africa are limited. Such information would enable countries to assess the performance of their surveillance systems, identify shortfalls for improvement and provide evidence of data reliability for policy making and public health interventions. Methods We used the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines to evaluate the performance of the influenza surveillance system (ISS) in Zambia during 2011–2017 using 9 attributes: (i) data quality and completeness, (ii) timeliness, (iii) representativeness, (iv) flexibility, (v) simplicity, (vi) acceptability, (vii) stability, (viii) utility, and (ix) sustainability. Each attribute was evaluated using pre-defined indicators. For each indicator we obtained the proportion (expressed as percentage) of the outcome of interest over the total. A scale from 1 to 3 was used to provide a score for each attribute as follows: < 60% (as obtained in the calculation above) scored 1 (weak performance); 60–79% scored 2 (moderate performance); ≥80% scored 3 (good performance). An overall score for each attribute and the ISS was obtained by averaging the scores of all evaluated attributes. Results The overall mean score for the ISS in Zambia was 2.6. Key strengths of the system were the quality of data generated (score: 2.9), its flexibility (score: 3.0) especially to monitor viral pathogens other than influenza viruses, its simplicity (score: 2.8), acceptability (score: 3.0) and stability (score: 2.6) over the review period and its relatively low cost ($310,000 per annum). Identified weaknesses related mainly to geographic representativeness (score: 2.0), timeliness (score: 2.5), especially in shipment of samples from remote sites, and sustainability (score: 1.0) in the absence of external funds. Conclusions The system performed moderately well in our evaluation. Key improvements would include improvements in the timeliness of samples shipments and geographical coverage. However, these improvements would result in increased cost and logistical complexity. The ISSS in Zambia is largely reliant on external funds and the acceptability of maintaining the surveillance system through national funds would require evaluation. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-14T15:23:49Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-0acd9b361dbf45759e17e24ec867aadc |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1472-6963 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-14T15:23:49Z |
| publishDate | 2020-01-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Health Services Research |
| spelling | doaj.art-0acd9b361dbf45759e17e24ec867aadc2022-12-21T22:56:04ZengBMCBMC Health Services Research1472-69632020-01-0120111210.1186/s12913-019-4884-5An evaluation of the Zambia influenza sentinel surveillance system, 2011–2017Paul Simusika0Stefano Tempia1Edward Chentulo2Lauren Polansky3Mazyanga Lucy Mazaba4Idah Ndumba5Quinn K. Mbewe6Mwaka Monze7National Influenza Center, Virology Laboratory, University Teaching HospitalInfluenza Division, Centers for Disease Control and PreventionNational Influenza Center, Virology Laboratory, University Teaching HospitalInfluenza Program, Centers for Disease Control and PreventionNational Influenza Center, Virology Laboratory, University Teaching HospitalNational Influenza Center, Virology Laboratory, University Teaching HospitalNational Influenza Center, Virology Laboratory, University Teaching HospitalNational Influenza Center, Virology Laboratory, University Teaching HospitalAbstract Background Over the past decade, influenza surveillance has been established in several African countries including Zambia. However, information on the on data quality and reliability of established influenza surveillance systems in Africa are limited. Such information would enable countries to assess the performance of their surveillance systems, identify shortfalls for improvement and provide evidence of data reliability for policy making and public health interventions. Methods We used the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines to evaluate the performance of the influenza surveillance system (ISS) in Zambia during 2011–2017 using 9 attributes: (i) data quality and completeness, (ii) timeliness, (iii) representativeness, (iv) flexibility, (v) simplicity, (vi) acceptability, (vii) stability, (viii) utility, and (ix) sustainability. Each attribute was evaluated using pre-defined indicators. For each indicator we obtained the proportion (expressed as percentage) of the outcome of interest over the total. A scale from 1 to 3 was used to provide a score for each attribute as follows: < 60% (as obtained in the calculation above) scored 1 (weak performance); 60–79% scored 2 (moderate performance); ≥80% scored 3 (good performance). An overall score for each attribute and the ISS was obtained by averaging the scores of all evaluated attributes. Results The overall mean score for the ISS in Zambia was 2.6. Key strengths of the system were the quality of data generated (score: 2.9), its flexibility (score: 3.0) especially to monitor viral pathogens other than influenza viruses, its simplicity (score: 2.8), acceptability (score: 3.0) and stability (score: 2.6) over the review period and its relatively low cost ($310,000 per annum). Identified weaknesses related mainly to geographic representativeness (score: 2.0), timeliness (score: 2.5), especially in shipment of samples from remote sites, and sustainability (score: 1.0) in the absence of external funds. Conclusions The system performed moderately well in our evaluation. Key improvements would include improvements in the timeliness of samples shipments and geographical coverage. However, these improvements would result in increased cost and logistical complexity. The ISSS in Zambia is largely reliant on external funds and the acceptability of maintaining the surveillance system through national funds would require evaluation.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4884-5InfluenzaSurveillanceEvaluationZambia |
| spellingShingle | Paul Simusika Stefano Tempia Edward Chentulo Lauren Polansky Mazyanga Lucy Mazaba Idah Ndumba Quinn K. Mbewe Mwaka Monze An evaluation of the Zambia influenza sentinel surveillance system, 2011–2017 BMC Health Services Research Influenza Surveillance Evaluation Zambia |
| title | An evaluation of the Zambia influenza sentinel surveillance system, 2011–2017 |
| title_full | An evaluation of the Zambia influenza sentinel surveillance system, 2011–2017 |
| title_fullStr | An evaluation of the Zambia influenza sentinel surveillance system, 2011–2017 |
| title_full_unstemmed | An evaluation of the Zambia influenza sentinel surveillance system, 2011–2017 |
| title_short | An evaluation of the Zambia influenza sentinel surveillance system, 2011–2017 |
| title_sort | evaluation of the zambia influenza sentinel surveillance system 2011 2017 |
| topic | Influenza Surveillance Evaluation Zambia |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4884-5 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT paulsimusika anevaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT stefanotempia anevaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT edwardchentulo anevaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT laurenpolansky anevaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT mazyangalucymazaba anevaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT idahndumba anevaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT quinnkmbewe anevaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT mwakamonze anevaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT paulsimusika evaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT stefanotempia evaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT edwardchentulo evaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT laurenpolansky evaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT mazyangalucymazaba evaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT idahndumba evaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT quinnkmbewe evaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 AT mwakamonze evaluationofthezambiainfluenzasentinelsurveillancesystem20112017 |