Table 2 Views of respondents on the design and implementation of eIDSR
Theme | Queries | Yes (%) | No (%) | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
The relevance of the eIDSR | eIDSR designed according to Nigerian Context | 45 (100) | 0 (0) | 45 |
Staff trained before implementation of eIDSR | 44 (98) | 1 (2) | 45 | |
Staff received supportive supervision during implementation of eIDSR | 42 (93) | 3 (7) | 45 | |
eIDSR suitable for health facilities reporting | 20 (95) | 1 (5) | 21 | |
Project progress and effectiveness | Alert detected in the last 3 months by the system | 25 (56) | 20 (44) | 45 |
The time lag of 2 h or less between detection and reporting of alerts | 28 (62) | 17 (38) | 45 | |
eIDSR data analyzed at the local levels | 7 (33) | 14 (67) | 21 | |
eIDSR used for action at the health facility levels | 44 (98) | 1 (2) | 45 | |
Implementation of eIDSR added burden to the work of the staff | 19 (42) | 26 (58) | 45 | |
eIDSR is a cost-effective option for public health surveillance in Nigeria | 20 (95) | 1 (5) | 21 | |
Efficiency | eIDSR reflects the efforts staff put into the surveillance system | 16 (76) | 5 (24) | 21 |
The system will contribute to e-surveillance in the long term | 21 (100) | 0 (0) | 21 |