Skip to main content

Advertisement

Research, Policy and Practice

Pastoralism Cover Image

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