Sharing experiences: towards an evidence based model of dengue surveillance and outbreak response in Latin America and Asia

BMC Public Health

Ayesha Verrall^1,10  Ronald Skewes³  Yodi Mahendradhata¹  Priscila Leite^1,12  Hien Tran Tinh⁹  Silvia Runge Ranzinger⁶  Novia Kuswara⁴  Axel Kroeger²  Ernesto Gozzer⁷  Jeremy Farrar⁵  David Benitez Valladares⁸  Shiraz Badurdeen^1,11 

[1] Research & Collaboration, Center for Tropical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia;HO/TDR, Geneva, Switzerland and School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK;Ministerio de Salud República Dominicana, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic;Ministry of Health Kuala Lumpur, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia;Tropical Medicine, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit in Viet Nam, Oxford, UK;Public Health Specialist, Stuttgart, Germany;Asociado FASPA/UPCH, Av. Honorio Delgado 430 San Martín de Porres, Lima, Perú;Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK;Clinical Research, Centre for Tropical Medicine Oxford University Clinical Research Unit Vietnam (OUCRU) Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Programme (MOP), Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam;Department of Medicine, National University Singapore, 1E Kent Ridge Road, NUHS Tower Block Level 11, Singapore 119228, Singapore;Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK;National Dengue Control Ministry of Health of Brazil Esplanada dos Ministérios, Ed sede, Bloco G, Sala 148, Brasilia/DF 70058-900, Brazil

关键词: Outbreak detection;    Outbreak response;    Dengue epidemics;    Dengue outbreaks;   

Others  :  1162075
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-13-607

 received in 2013-01-31, accepted in 2013-06-20,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The increasing frequency and intensity of dengue outbreaks in endemic and non-endemic countries requires a rational, evidence based response. To this end, we aimed to collate the experiences of a number of affected countries, identify strengths and limitations in dengue surveillance, outbreak preparedness, detection and response and contribute towards the development of a model contingency plan adaptable to country needs.

Methods

The study was undertaken in five Latin American (Brazil, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Mexico, Peru) and five in Asian countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Vietnam). A mixed-methods approach was used which included document analysis, key informant interviews, focus-group discussions, secondary data analysis and consensus building by an international dengue expert meeting organised by the World Health Organization, Special Program for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (WHO-TDR).

Results

Country information on dengue is based on compulsory notification and reporting (“passive surveillance”), with laboratory confirmation (in all participating Latin American countries and some Asian countries) or by using a clinical syndromic definition. Seven countries additionally had sentinel sites with active dengue reporting, some also had virological surveillance. Six had agreed a formal definition of a dengue outbreak separate to seasonal variation in case numbers. Countries collected data on a range of warning signs that may identify outbreaks early, but none had developed a systematic approach to identifying and responding to the early stages of an outbreak. Outbreak response plans varied in quality, particularly regarding the early response. The surge capacity of hospitals with recent dengue outbreaks varied; those that could mobilise additional staff, beds, laboratory support and resources coped best in comparison to those improvising a coping strategy during the outbreak. Hospital outbreak management plans were present in 9/22 participating hospitals in Latin-America and 8/20 participating hospitals in Asia.

Conclusions

Considerable variation between countries was observed with regard to surveillance, outbreak detection, and response. Through discussion at the expert meeting, suggestions were made for the development of a more standardised approach in the form of a model contingency plan, with agreed outbreak definitions and country-specific risk assessment schemes to initiate early response activities according to the outbreak phase. This would also allow greater cross-country sharing of ideas.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Badurdeen et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]WHO: Global strategy for dengue prevention and control 2012–2020. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2012.
• [2]Heyman D: Control of communicable diseases in man. Washington DC: The American Public Health Association; 2008.
• [3]Buehler JW, Hopkins RS, Overhage JM, Sosin DM, Tong V, CDC Working Group: Framework for evaluating public health surveillance systems for early detection of outbreaks: recommendations from the CDC Working Group. MMWR Recomm Rep 2004, 53:1-11.
• [4]Runge-Ranzinger S, Horstick O, Marx M, Kroeger A: What does dengue disease surveillance contribute to predicting and detecting outbreaks and describing trends? Trop Med Int Health 2008, 13:1022-1041.
• [5]WHO: Dengue guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, prevention and control. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009.
• [6]Esu E, Lenhart A, Smith L, Horstick O: Effectiveness of peridomestic space spraying with insecticide on dengue transmission; systematic review. Trop Med Int Health 2010, 15:619-631.
• [7]Pilger D, De Maesschalck M, Horstick O, San Martin J: Dengue outbreak response: documented effective interventions and evidence gaps. TropIKA.net Journal 2010., 1(1) http://journal.tropika.net/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2078-86062010000100002&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en webcite
• [8]Gubler DJ: How effectively is epidemiological surveillance used for dengue programme planning and epidemic Response? Dengue Bulletin 2002, 26:96-106.
• [9]Beatty ME, Stone A, Fitzsimons DW, Hanna JN, Lam SK, et al.: Best practices in dengue surveillance: a report from the Asia-Pacific and Americas Dengue Prevention Boards. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2010, 4(11):e890.
• [10]Khan M, Manderson L: Focus groups in tropical diseases research. Health Policy and Planning 1992, 7:56-66.
• [11]Tun-Lin W, Lenhart A, Nam VS, Rebollar-Tellez E, Morrison AC, et al.: Reducing costs and operational constraints of dengue vector control by targeting productive breeding places: a multi-country non-inferiority cluster randomized trial. Trop Med Int Health 2009, 14:1143-1153.
• [12]Farrington P, Andrews N: Outbreak detection: Application to infectious disease surveillance. In Monitoring the health of populations. Edited by Brookmeyer R, Stroup DF. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004:203-232.
• [13]Rigau-Perez JG, Millard PS, Walker DR, Deseda CC, Casta Velez A: A deviation bar chart for detecting dengue outbreaks in Puerto Rico. Am J Public Health 1999, 89:374-378.
• [14]Barbazan P, Yoksan S, Gonzalez JP: Dengue Haemorrhagic Fever epidemiology in Thailand: description and forecasting of epidemics. Microbes Infect 2002, 4:699-705.
• [15]Stroup DF, Williamson GD, Hendon JL, Karon JM: Detection of aberrations in the occurrence of notifiable diseases surveillance data. Stat Med 1989, 8:323-329.
• [16]Brookmeyer R, Stroup DF: Monitoring the health of populations. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004.
• [17]Focks DA, Brenner RJ, Hayes J, Daniels E: Transmission thresholds for dengue in terms of pupae per person with discussion of their utility in source reduction efforts. AmJTrop Med Hyg 2000, 62:11-18.