Skip to main content

Research, Policy and Practice

Table 4 A summary of the mid-level livestock surveillance system evaluation

From: Stakeholders’ perceptions on performance of the Livestock Disease Surveillance system in Uganda: A case of Pallisa and Kumi Districts

Theme

Sub-theme: strengths

Sub-theme: weakness/areas for improvement

Usefulness

Detects trends signalling changes in disease occurrence

Detects epidemics

Provides estimates of morbidity and mortality magnitude of disease

Leads to improved clinical practice

Triggers intervention by MAAIF

Identification of risk factors associated with disease occurrence

Assessment of effects of disease control measures

Simplicity

Visits to the veterinary office and use of telephones by farmers to report suspected cases

Incompetence of farmers to identify emerging diseases

Inadequate information for disease diagnosis

Reluctance of DVOs to submit monthly reports to MAAIF

Timeliness

Farmers quickly report suspected diseases to the veterinary staffs

Delayed intervention

Inadequate financial support from MAAIF to facilitate the surveillance activities

Representativeness

Generic description of the distribution of infection in the population by place and type of animal hosts possible using information reported by farmers

More accurate information describing the pattern of the outbreak in the community like herd size, management systems and exact onset of infection left out since this requires technical expertise

Sensitivity

Case reporting when seeking treatment for sick animals is high, hence the ability to detect disease outbreaks

Diagnosis is only based on clinical signs

Laboratory confirmatory diagnosis not done

Flexibility

None

Active functioning of the system is inclined to funding from international projects.

The system is not able to adjust to variations in funds and personnel

Acceptability

The farmers always show willingness to report diseases when they occur

Need for all actors to improve on their involvement in the reporting, transmitting and providing of feedback

Data quality

Case information obtained from the local communities is validated by local veterinarians under instruction of the District Veterinary Officer to avoid false alarms

The surveillance forms provided by MAAIF need to be revised to improve the quality of data collected routinely