Cargando…

Dengue disease surveillance: an updated systematic literature review

OBJECTIVES: To review the evidence for the application of tools for dengue outbreak prediction/detection and trend monitoring in passive and active disease surveillance systems in order to develop recommendations for endemic countries and identify important research needs. METHODS: This systematic l...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Runge-Ranzinger, S, McCall, P J, Kroeger, A, Horstick, O
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BlackWell Publishing Ltd 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4253126/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24889501
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tmi.12333
_version_ 1782347231336071168
author Runge-Ranzinger, S
McCall, P J
Kroeger, A
Horstick, O
author_facet Runge-Ranzinger, S
McCall, P J
Kroeger, A
Horstick, O
author_sort Runge-Ranzinger, S
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To review the evidence for the application of tools for dengue outbreak prediction/detection and trend monitoring in passive and active disease surveillance systems in order to develop recommendations for endemic countries and identify important research needs. METHODS: This systematic literature review followed the protocol of a review from 2008, extending the systematic search from January 2007 to February 2013 on PubMed, EMBASE, CDSR, WHOLIS and Lilacs. Data reporting followed the PRISMA statement. The eligibility criteria comprised (i) population at risk of dengue, (ii) dengue disease surveillance, (iii) outcome of surveillance described and (iv) empirical data evaluated. The analysis classified studies based on the purpose of the surveillance programme. The main limitation of the review was expected publication bias. RESULTS: A total of 1116 papers were identified of which 36 articles were included in the review. Four cohort-based prospective studies calculated expansion factors demonstrating remarkable levels of underreporting in the surveillance systems. Several studies demonstrated that enhancement methods such as laboratory support, sentinel-based reporting and staff motivation contributed to improvements in dengue reporting. Additional improvements for passive surveillance systems are possible by incorporating simple data forms/entry/electronic-based reporting; defining clear system objectives; performing data analysis at the lowest possible level (e.g. district); seeking regular data feedback. Six studies showed that serotype changes were positively correlated with the number of reported cases or with dengue incidence, with lag times of up to 6 months. Three studies found that data on internet searches and event-based surveillance correlated well with the epidemic curve derived from surveillance data. CONCLUSIONS: Passive surveillance providing the baseline for outbreak alert should be strengthened and appropriate threshold levels for outbreak alerts investigated. Additional enhancement tools such as syndromic surveillance, laboratory support and motivation strategies can be added. Appropriate alert signals need to be identified and integrated into a risk assessment tool. Shifts in dengue serotypes/genotype or electronic event-based surveillance have also considerable potential as indicator in dengue surveillance. Further research on evidence-based response strategies and cost-effectiveness is needed. OBJECTIFS: Analyser les résultats de l'application d'outils pour la prédiction/détection des épidémies de dengue et la surveillance des tendances dans les systèmes de surveillance active et passive des maladies, afin d’élaborer des recommandations pour les pays endémiques et identifier les besoins importants de recherche.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4253126
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BlackWell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42531262014-12-08 Dengue disease surveillance: an updated systematic literature review Runge-Ranzinger, S McCall, P J Kroeger, A Horstick, O Trop Med Int Health Dengue Surveillance OBJECTIVES: To review the evidence for the application of tools for dengue outbreak prediction/detection and trend monitoring in passive and active disease surveillance systems in order to develop recommendations for endemic countries and identify important research needs. METHODS: This systematic literature review followed the protocol of a review from 2008, extending the systematic search from January 2007 to February 2013 on PubMed, EMBASE, CDSR, WHOLIS and Lilacs. Data reporting followed the PRISMA statement. The eligibility criteria comprised (i) population at risk of dengue, (ii) dengue disease surveillance, (iii) outcome of surveillance described and (iv) empirical data evaluated. The analysis classified studies based on the purpose of the surveillance programme. The main limitation of the review was expected publication bias. RESULTS: A total of 1116 papers were identified of which 36 articles were included in the review. Four cohort-based prospective studies calculated expansion factors demonstrating remarkable levels of underreporting in the surveillance systems. Several studies demonstrated that enhancement methods such as laboratory support, sentinel-based reporting and staff motivation contributed to improvements in dengue reporting. Additional improvements for passive surveillance systems are possible by incorporating simple data forms/entry/electronic-based reporting; defining clear system objectives; performing data analysis at the lowest possible level (e.g. district); seeking regular data feedback. Six studies showed that serotype changes were positively correlated with the number of reported cases or with dengue incidence, with lag times of up to 6 months. Three studies found that data on internet searches and event-based surveillance correlated well with the epidemic curve derived from surveillance data. CONCLUSIONS: Passive surveillance providing the baseline for outbreak alert should be strengthened and appropriate threshold levels for outbreak alerts investigated. Additional enhancement tools such as syndromic surveillance, laboratory support and motivation strategies can be added. Appropriate alert signals need to be identified and integrated into a risk assessment tool. Shifts in dengue serotypes/genotype or electronic event-based surveillance have also considerable potential as indicator in dengue surveillance. Further research on evidence-based response strategies and cost-effectiveness is needed. OBJECTIFS: Analyser les résultats de l'application d'outils pour la prédiction/détection des épidémies de dengue et la surveillance des tendances dans les systèmes de surveillance active et passive des maladies, afin d’élaborer des recommandations pour les pays endémiques et identifier les besoins importants de recherche. BlackWell Publishing Ltd 2014-09 2014-05-28 /pmc/articles/PMC4253126/ /pubmed/24889501 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tmi.12333 Text en © 2014 The Authors. Tropical Medicine and International Health Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Dengue Surveillance
Runge-Ranzinger, S
McCall, P J
Kroeger, A
Horstick, O
Dengue disease surveillance: an updated systematic literature review
title Dengue disease surveillance: an updated systematic literature review
title_full Dengue disease surveillance: an updated systematic literature review
title_fullStr Dengue disease surveillance: an updated systematic literature review
title_full_unstemmed Dengue disease surveillance: an updated systematic literature review
title_short Dengue disease surveillance: an updated systematic literature review
title_sort dengue disease surveillance: an updated systematic literature review
topic Dengue Surveillance
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4253126/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24889501
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tmi.12333
work_keys_str_mv AT rungeranzingers denguediseasesurveillanceanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT mccallpj denguediseasesurveillanceanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT kroegera denguediseasesurveillanceanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT horsticko denguediseasesurveillanceanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview