| Literature DB >> 31961314 |
Bernard C Silenou, Daniel Tom-Aba, Olawunmi Adeoye, Chinedu C Arinze, Ferdinand Oyiri, Anthony K Suleman, Adesola Yinka-Ogunleye, Juliane Dörrbecker, Chikwe Ihekweazu, Gérard Krause.
Abstract
In November 2017, the mobile digital Surveillance Outbreak Response Management and Analysis System was deployed in 30 districts in Nigeria in response to an outbreak of monkeypox. Adaptation and activation of the system took 14 days, and its use improved timeliness, completeness, and overall capacity of the response.Entities:
Keywords: Africa; Nigeria; SORMAS; Surveillance Outbreak Response Management and Analysis System; contact tracing; digital health; mHealth; mobile health; monkeypox virus; outbreak detection; surveillance; viruses
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31961314 PMCID: PMC6986835 DOI: 10.3201/eid2602.191139
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Emerg Infect Dis ISSN: 1080-6040 Impact factor: 6.883
Qualitative comparison of attributes of SORMAS and the conventional surveillance system in response to monkeypox outbreak in Nigeria, November 2017–July 2019
| Attribute | SORMAS | CS | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average time for data to arrive at NCDC from LGAs | 2 min | 2 d | For the CS, the DSNOs sent the paper case forms by post to NCDC, thus requiring longer time for case forms to arrive at NCDC. |
| Average time to update data (sample results from the laboratory, case classification, outcome, contacts) per case | 5 min | 20 min | Update in SORMAS requires searching for a case in the case directory and directly updating the fields. For the CS, the database was Excel ( |
| Workload to transfer cases from paper forms to database at NCDC | Less | More | With the CS, all case forms were entered in an Excel database at NCDC; with SORMAS, 90 (38%) of the 240 cases were entered directly from the field by DSNOs. |
| Availability of dashboard and statistics module to generate epidemiologic indicators for disease surveillance (e.g., case classification status, epidemic curve, laboratory test results, fatalities, and map of spatial distribution of cases and contact persons) | Yes | No | SORMAS had a dashboard that displayed the needed surveillance indicators; the CS did not. |
*CS, conventional system; DSNOs, district surveillance notification officers; NCDC, Nigeria Centre for Disease Control; LGAs, local government areas; SORMAS, Surveillance Outbreak Response Management and Analysis System.
Quantitative comparison of attributes of SORMAS and the conventional surveillance system in response to monkeypox outbreak in Nigeria, November 2017–July 2019*
| Data availability for selected variables | SORMAS, %† n = 90 | CS, %‡ n = 150 | 95% CI for difference |
| Sex | 91 | 92 | (−0.09 to 0.07) |
| Occupation | 84 | 57 | (0.15 to 0.39) |
| Date of birth | 69 | 55 | (0.00 to 0.27) |
| Onset date of symptoms | 89 | 85 | (−0.06 to 0.13) |
| Body temperature | 53 | 3 | (0.39 to 0.62) |
*95% CI indicates difference in percentage of completeness determined by using 2-sample χ2 test. CS, conventional system; SORMAS, Surveillance Outbreak Response Management and Analysis System. †Percentage of completeness for monkeypox cases notified directly in SORMAS by district surveillance officers in the field. ‡Percentage of completeness for monkeypox cases that arrived at the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control though the conventional system and were retrospectively registered in SORMAS.
Figure 1SORMAS dashboard showing monkeypox cases notified September 2017–July 2019 in Nigeria. The map shows the spatial spread of cases with local government area color by incidence proportion/100,000 population. The incidence proportion ranges from 0.1 (quartiles 0.3–0.7) to 8.1. During 2017, the number of cases by epidemic week increases gradually from week 32 to week 39, sharply increases in week 40, and gradually declines until week 53. Exportation of graphs, tables, and other epidemic indicators was generated in the statistic module of SORMAS. SORMAS, Surveillance Outbreak Response Management and Analysis System.
Figure 2Network diagram for monkeypox cases and contact persons in Nigeria notified November 2017–July 2019. The nodes are labeled with unique identifiers for each person and colored by their classification status. Among case-patients, >1 contact person was reported for 57 (24%). The average number of contact persons/case-patient was 3 (quartiles 1–4, range 1–23). Arrows show the possible direction of infection transmission.