Cargando…

Tracking the Implementation to Identify Gaps in Integrated Disease Surveillance Program in a Block of District Jhajjar (Haryana)

CONTEXT: To strengthen the surveillance system in India, Integrated Disease Surveillance Program (IDSP) was launched in 2004. The frequent occurrence of epidemics even after the launching of the IDSP was an indication toward inadequacy of the system. The responsibility for effective implementation o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kumar, Arun, Goel, Manish Kumar, Jain, Ram Bilas, Khanna, Pardeep
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4209674/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25374856
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2249-4863.141612
Descripción
Sumario:CONTEXT: To strengthen the surveillance system in India, Integrated Disease Surveillance Program (IDSP) was launched in 2004. The frequent occurrence of epidemics even after the launching of the IDSP was an indication toward inadequacy of the system. The responsibility for effective implementation of IDSP at the sub-center level lies with the health workers. AIMS: The aim of the following study was to assess the knowledge and practice of health workers regarding IDSP and to assess the quality of IDSP reports at the sub-center level. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: It was cross-sectional study carried out in the area under Community Health Center Dighal which is the rural field practice area attached to Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak in the State of Haryana, India. Subjects and Methods: All the 24 sub-centers in the area were visited and 46 health workers (22 male; 24 female) who met the inclusion criteria i.e. who had completed 1 year of their service or had been trained for IDSP, were included in the study. Data were collected on a self-designed, semi-structured and pre-tested schedule by interviewing the study subjects and observation of the records/reports. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Percentages and proportions. RESULTS: Only 14/46 (~30%) of the workers could expand the abbreviation “IDSP” correctly. Only 4/46 (~9%) workers could narrate any of the trigger events and none could tell all the trigger events. Only at 12 such sub-centers, diagnoses were being written in their out-patient registers according to the defined syndromes. 43/46 (~93%) workers were not aware of the zero reporting. CONCLUSIONS: The surveillance system is much less alert and intense than the desired level and needs to be strengthened.