See the published version of this preprint at BMC Public Health.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Research article
Luka Mangveep Ibrahim
World Health Organization
Corresponding Author
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Electronic reporting of integrated disease surveillance and response (eIDSR) was implemented in Adamawa and Yobe states, North-East of Nigeria, as an innovative strategy to improve disease reporting. Its objectives were to improve the timeliness and completeness of IDSR reporting by health facilities, prompt identification of public health events, timely information sharing, and public health action. We evaluated the project to determine whether it met its set objectives.
Method: We conducted a cross-sectional study to assess and document the lessons learned from the project. We reviewed the performance of the local government areas (LGAs) on timeliness and completeness of reporting, rumors identification, and reporting on the eIDSR and the traditional paper-based system using a checklist. Respondents were interviewed online on the relevance, efficiency, sustainability, project progress and effectiveness, the effectiveness of management, and potential impact and scalability of the strategy using structured questionnaires. Data were cleaned, analyzed, and presented as proportions using an MS Excel spreadsheet. Responses were also presented as direct quotes.
Results: The number of health facilities reporting IDSR increased from 103 to 228 (117%) before and after implementation of the eIDSR respectively. The timeliness of reporting was 43% in the LGA compared to 73% in health facilities implementing eIDSR. The completeness of IDSR reports in the last six months before the evaluation was ≥ 85%. Of the 201 rumors identified and verified, 161 (80%) were from the eIDSR pilot sites. The majority of the stakeholders interviewed believed that eIDSR met its predetermined objectives for public health surveillance. The benefits of eIDSR included timely reporting and response to alerts and disease outbreaks, improved timeliness, and completeness of reporting, and supportive supervision to the operational levels. The strategy helped stakeholders to appreciate their roles in public health surveillance.
Conclusion: The eIDSR has increased the number of health facilities reporting IDSR, enabled early identification, reporting, and verification of alerts, improved timeliness and completeness of reports, and supportive supervision of staff at the operational levels. It was well accepted by the stakeholder as a system that made reporting easy with the potential to improve the public health surveillance system in Nigeria.
Keywords
Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response, electronic reporting, eIDSR, Nigeria
Figure 1
Figure 2
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Public Health.
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 03 Jan, 2021
Editor assigned
On 21 Dec, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 21 Dec, 2020
Editor invited
On 21 Dec, 2020
Version 2
Posted 16 Dec, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 08 Dec, 2020
Editor assigned
On 28 Nov, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 28 Nov, 2020
Editor invited
On 28 Nov, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 15 Oct, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 06 Oct, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 20 Sep, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 20 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 06 Sep, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 29 Aug, 2020
Editor assigned
On 04 Aug, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 03 Aug, 2020
Editor invited
On 03 Aug, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
See the published version of this preprint at BMC Public Health.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Luka Mangveep Ibrahim
World Health Organization
Corresponding Author
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Public Health.
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 03 Jan, 2021
Editor assigned
On 21 Dec, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 21 Dec, 2020
Editor invited
On 21 Dec, 2020
Version 2
Posted 16 Dec, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 08 Dec, 2020
Editor assigned
On 28 Nov, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 28 Nov, 2020
Editor invited
On 28 Nov, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 15 Oct, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 06 Oct, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 20 Sep, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 20 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 06 Sep, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 29 Aug, 2020
Editor assigned
On 04 Aug, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 03 Aug, 2020
Editor invited
On 03 Aug, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at BMC Public Health.
Background: Electronic reporting of integrated disease surveillance and response (eIDSR) was implemented in Adamawa and Yobe states, North-East of Nigeria, as an innovative strategy to improve disease reporting. Its objectives were to improve the timeliness and completeness of IDSR reporting by health facilities, prompt identification of public health events, timely information sharing, and public health action. We evaluated the project to determine whether it met its set objectives.
Method: We conducted a cross-sectional study to assess and document the lessons learned from the project. We reviewed the performance of the local government areas (LGAs) on timeliness and completeness of reporting, rumors identification, and reporting on the eIDSR and the traditional paper-based system using a checklist. Respondents were interviewed online on the relevance, efficiency, sustainability, project progress and effectiveness, the effectiveness of management, and potential impact and scalability of the strategy using structured questionnaires. Data were cleaned, analyzed, and presented as proportions using an MS Excel spreadsheet. Responses were also presented as direct quotes.
Results: The number of health facilities reporting IDSR increased from 103 to 228 (117%) before and after implementation of the eIDSR respectively. The timeliness of reporting was 43% in the LGA compared to 73% in health facilities implementing eIDSR. The completeness of IDSR reports in the last six months before the evaluation was ≥ 85%. Of the 201 rumors identified and verified, 161 (80%) were from the eIDSR pilot sites. The majority of the stakeholders interviewed believed that eIDSR met its predetermined objectives for public health surveillance. The benefits of eIDSR included timely reporting and response to alerts and disease outbreaks, improved timeliness, and completeness of reporting, and supportive supervision to the operational levels. The strategy helped stakeholders to appreciate their roles in public health surveillance.
Conclusion: The eIDSR has increased the number of health facilities reporting IDSR, enabled early identification, reporting, and verification of alerts, improved timeliness and completeness of reports, and supportive supervision of staff at the operational levels. It was well accepted by the stakeholder as a system that made reporting easy with the potential to improve the public health surveillance system in Nigeria.
Figure 1
Figure 2
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...