Sites | Major observations |
---|---|
State levels | - IDSR Technical guidelines and standard case definitions were available in all offices but no evidence of usage by the staff - Very few private health facilities participated in IDSR implantation and reporting - No evidence of community based surveillance - No evidence of analysis of IDSR data other than on polio eradication initiative activities - All staff interviewed knew only timeliness and completeness as the core indicators for IDSR at both health facility and Local Government Areas levels - Supervision to the lower levels were done but there were no reports seen - The IDSR supervisory checklists were not used - There was no evidence of written feedbacks to the supervisees - Lack of motorbikes to facilitate supportive supervision |
Local government levels | - IDSR technical guidelines and list of standard case definitions were available in the Local Government Areas offices but were not put to used. - DSNOs limit collection of IDSR data to only designated focal sites for AFP surveillance of the polio eradication initiatives - There was no evidence of recent analysis of IDSR data - There were supervisory visits to the lower levels but there were no reports of the activities. - Supervision were not done with the IDSR standard supervision checklists - Staff had been trained but there was no focus on basic concept of IDSR, identification, reporting, analysis and response to outbreak of diseases. - All the outpatient registers reviewed revealed missing data - Staff interviewed complained of lack of means of transportation for supervision and retrieval of IDSR data from the health facilities - The staff interviewed knew only timeliness and completeness as the core indicators for IDSR at the health facility level. - Lack of motorbikes for retrieval of surveillance data from the health facilities, supportive supervision, verification and response to outbreaks of diseases, conditions and events. |