Evaluation of the acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) surveillance system, Gokwe North district, Zimbabwe, 2015: a descriptive cross sectional study

Le résumé fourni par la source

INTRODUCTION: AFP surveillance was adopted globally as a key strategy for monitoring the progress of the polio eradication initiative. Gokwe North district with an estimated 119 655 children <15 years detected 2 cases, 4 cases and 1 case of AFP in 2012, 2013 and 2014 respectively against a target of 5 cases per year. We therefore set out to evaluate the system and find out why it was failing to detect at least 5 cases per year. METHODS: A descriptive cross sectional study was carried out. All three hospitals in the district were purposively selected. Twelve of the nineteen health facilities were randomly selected and forty nine health workers were purposively recruited. An interviewer administered questionnaire and key informant interview guide were used to collect data. Quantitative data was analysed using Epi info. RESULTS: Out of the 49 respondents, 17(34.7%) knew the target age group for AFP surveillance. Twelve (24.5%) knew the number of notification forms to be filled. Seven (14.3%) and ten (20.4%) respondents knew when to follow up an AFP case and when an AFP case should be followed up and completely notified and investigated respectively. Forty one (83.7%) respondents were not trained on AFP surveillance. Nineteen (39%) had AFP notification forms at the clinic and 33(67%) had displayed AFP case definitions. All the 22 health facilities in the district participate in AFP surveillance; however, all have hard to reach areas. Seventeen (34.7%) reportedly took public health actions based on AFP data. CONCLUSION: The system was found to be useful, simple, acceptable, timely, unstable, not representative and not sensitive. The system was threatened by lack of health worker knowledge and community active search. Advocacy, communication and social mobilization on AFP surveillance might improve the performance of the system in Gokwe North district.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.