Table 3 Findings from the evaluation of the influenza like-illness surveillance system in Tunisia, 2012–2015
From: Evaluation of the influenza-like illness surveillance system in Tunisia, 2012–2015
Attributes and definitions | Indicators | Scores a | Mean score |
|---|---|---|---|
Data quality and completeness The completeness and validity of the data recorded in the public health surveillance system | • Proportion of ILI surveillance staff that identified correctly the ILI case definition | 2 | 2.7 |
• Proportion of ILI surveillance staff that identified correctly the sampling criteria | 2 | ||
• Proportion of collected variables included in the WHO recommended minimum data collection for influenza sentinel surveillanceb | 2 | ||
• Quality and proficiency of NIC laboratory detection of of influenza using RT-PCR | 5 | ||
Representativeness Describes the occurrence of a health-related event over time and its distribution in the population by place and person | • Geographical coverage d | 4 | 4.5 |
• Inclusion of all age groups d | 5 | ||
Timeliness Reflects the speed between steps in a public health surveillance system | • Proportion of NIC staff estimating that more than 80% of results of tested samples were obtained within 7days from the date of reception | 5 | 3.4 |
• Proportion of ILI surveillance staff estimating that more than 80% of aggregated data were sent within 7 days from ILI sites to regional directorates | 3 | ||
• Proportion of ILI surveillance staff estimating that more than 80% of aggregated data were sent within 1 month from ILI sites to regional directorates | 3 | ||
• Proportion of regional directorates surveillance staff estimating that more than 80% of aggregated data were sent within 7 days to DSSB | 3 | ||
• Proportion of regional directorates surveillance staff estimating that more than 80% of aggregated data were sent within 1 month to DSSB | 3 | ||
Simplicity Refers to both structure and ease of operation of a public health surveillance system | • Perception of surveillance staff on the ease of accomplishing these surveillance activities: | 2 | 2.5 |
▪ Data collection for the sampling form | 3 | ||
▪ Data collection for the shipment form | 3 | ||
▪ specimen collection | 2 | ||
• Mean of time devoted to weekly surveillance activities c | |||
Acceptability The willingness of persons and organizations to participate in the surveillance system | • Proportion of surveillance staff that was satisfied with the following: | 3.0 | |
▪ Virological surveillance report | 2 | ||
▪ Influenza bulletin | 2 | ||
▪ Communication | 3 | ||
• The proportion of surveillance staff that reported that the surveillance system was good: | |||
▪ ILI surveillance staff | 3 | ||
▪ NIC surveillance staff | 4 | ||
▪ Regional directorate | 4 | ||
Flexibility The ability of a surveillance system to changing information needs or operating conditions with little additional time, personnel, or allocated funds | • The 2014 decrease in the number of ILI sites performing surveillance d | 3 | 4.0 |
• The adoption of new ILI forms d | 4 | ||
• Inclusion of other pathogens surveyed with influenza surveillance system d | 5 | ||
Stability The reliability and availability of the public health surveillance system | • Proportion of ILI surveillance staff that report using: | 2.7 | |
▪ SOP for sampling | 3 | ||
▪ SOP for shipment | 3 | ||
▪ Influenza Surveillance Guide | 2 | ||
• Proportion of ILI surveillance staff that report being trained on: | |||
▪ Epidemiological surveillance | 2 | ||
▪ Influenza surveillance activities | 2 | ||
▪ Influenza-specific response activities | 2 | ||
▪ The practice of nasopharyngeal specimens | 2 | ||
• Proportion of ILI surveillance staff that reported that depletion of stock never occurred for: | |||
▪ Data collection forms | 4 | ||
▪ Sampling material | 3 | ||
▪ Protective equipment | 3 | ||
Utility Does the system provide information that is useful for public health authorities and communities | • Proportion of ILI surveillance staff that reported that the influenza surveillance system: | 3.6 | |
▪ was important | 4 | ||
▪ provided useful data | 4 | ||
• Proportion of ILI surveillance staff that reported that they regularly receive the following reports: | |||
▪ Virological surveillance report | 2 | ||
▪ Monthly Influenza bulletin | 2 | ||
▪ Annual Influenza report | 3 | ||
• Identification and sharing of circulating seasonal influenza strainsd | 5 | ||
• Contribution of influenza viruses to WHO CC for vaccine strain selection: | |||
▪ participation with WHO CC for vaccine selection | 5 | ||
▪ number of shipments | 4 | ||
▪ adherence to recommended timing of shipment | 3 | ||
• Outbreaks detected over pre-established threshold during the evaluation period d | 4 | ||
Overall total | 3.3 |