Leptospirosis surveillance evaluation in Trang, 1 January–30 September 2017

Abstract

Background: Leptospirosis is the priority disease of Trang Province. The trend of morbidity rate and mortality rate were still increasing. The team then conducted the Leptospirosis surveillance evaluation of Trang Province. The objectives were to describe the disease reporting process, to know the quantitative and qualitative attributes and to give the recommendation.
Methods: The Cross-sectional study during 1 January–30 September 2017 was conducted. The target group was the patients who visited at 10 hospitals of Trang Province and were diagnosed with selected ICD-10. We retrieved 507 medical records from 10 hospitals as a sampling for reviewing. The chosen numbers of medical records in each hospital were related to the proportional number of selected ICD-10 diagnosed medical records. We analysed the Leptospirosis Surveillance data to identify for the quantitative attributes and interviewed 46 health personnel for the qualitative attributes.
Results and Conclusions: From reviewing medical records, 291 cases met with the case definition of Leptospirosis surveillance, only 60 cases were reported in 506 reporting system. Of reporting system, the sensitivity was 20.6%, the positive predictive value was 95.2%. All medical records (100%) had completely filled variables. But the accuracy was low in 2 variables: ‘type of patients’ was 75% and ‘onset date’ was 36%. The timeliness of reporting was 85.7%. ‘Gender’ and ‘Age’ were only two variables that could be representatives of population. For qualitative attributes, the process of reporting system was simple (not complex). Both administrators and operational staff realized the importance of disease reporting system. There were replacement systems when any staff was absent or any position was vacant. There were information back-up systems in order to prevent loss of data and information in critical situation. There was enough budget to support the disease reporting systems. The organizations improved internal process for efficiency. However, the utilization of 506 report was relatively low. Especially for epidemic detection, making the reports and giving back information to clinical personnel. Officers who were responsible for sending R506 data, should recheck the data especially the onset date before sending to provincial health office.