Evaluation of a national surveillance unit

• Published in: Archives of disease in childhood Vol. 80; no. 1; pp. 21 - 27
• Main Authors: Gazarian, Madlen, Williams, Katrina, Elliott, Elizabeth, Chant, Kerry, Longbottom, Helen, Mellis, Craig, Nolan, Terry, Oates, R K, Ruben, Alan
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health 01.01.1999; BMJ; BMJ Publishing Group LTD; BMJ Group
• Subjects: Acquired immune deficiency syndrome; AIDS; Annual reports; Australia; Biological and medical sciences; Case Studies; Chicken pox; Child; Child Health; Child, Preschool; Communicable Diseases; Congenital diseases; Cost control; Data collection; Dementia; Disease control; Disease Incidence; Drowning; Epidemiologic Methods; Estimates; evaluation; Evaluation Studies as Topic; Flow Charts; Guidelines; Health Personnel; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Kawasaki disease; Medical personnel; Medical sciences; Morbidity; Mortality; Original; paediatric surveillance unit; Pediatrics - methods; Prevention and actions; Public health; Public Health Practice; Public health. Hygiene; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine; questionnaire; Questionnaires; Resource Allocation; Sensitivity and Specificity; Specific populations (family, woman, child, elderly...); Studies; Trends; Tropical medicine; Australia; Human; Evaluation; Health policy; Surveillance; Unit; Child; Public health
• ISSN: 0003-9888; 1468-2044
• DOI: 10.1136/adc.80.1.21

AIM The Australian Paediatric Surveillance Unit (APSU) facilitates national active surveillance of uncommon childhood conditions. This study assessed whether it fulfilled its objectives and satisfied criteria established by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for evaluating surveillance systems. METHODS Anonymous questionnaires were sent to users of the system, individual studies were reviewed, and data were collected from independent sources. RESULTS Seven hundred and sixty six clinicians, 48 investigators, and 15 public health professionals responded to the questionnaires. Clinicians reported that the APSU was useful, 33% saying information provided by the APSU informed or changed their clinical practice. Most (88%) reported that completing monthly report cards was not a burden. Impact on policy development was limited by suboptimal dissemination of information to public health professionals. Flexibility and timeliness were limited by design. Estimated sensitivity of APSU studies ranged from 92% (congenital rubella) to 31% (drowning/near drowning). Positive predictive value of notified cases was over 70% for most studies. CONCLUSION The APSU fulfils most of its objectives and meets CDC criteria salient to these. Ways in which the APSU could be improved have been identified, as have methodological challenges and limitations in applying CDC guidelines to this type of unit.