Documenting the development, adoption and pre-ebola implementation of Liberia's integrated disease surveillance and response (IDSR) strategy.
Ebola Virus Disease
Health Management Information System
Health System strengthening
Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response
Liberia
Public Health Emergency
West Africa
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 10 2023
25 10 2023
Historique:
received:
29
06
2023
accepted:
17
10
2023
medline:
27
10
2023
pubmed:
26
10
2023
entrez:
25
10
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In the immediate aftermath of a 14-year civil conflict that disrupted the health system, Liberia adopted the internationally recommended integrated disease surveillance and response (IDSR) strategy in 2004. Despite this, Liberia was among the three West African countries ravaged by the worst Ebola epidemic in history from 2014 to 2016. This paper describes successes, failures, strengths, and weaknesses in the development, adoption, and implementation of IDSR following the civil war and up until the outbreak of Ebola, from 2004 to early 2014. We reviewed 112 official Government documents and peer-reviewed articles and conducted 29 in-depth interviews with key informants from December 2021 to March 2022 to gain perspectives on IDSR in the post-conflict and pre-Ebola era in Liberia. We assessed the core and supportive functions of IDSR, such as notification of priority diseases, confirmation, reporting, analysis, investigation, response, feedback, monitoring, staff training, supervision, communication, and financial resources. Data were triangulated and presented via emerging themes and in-depth accounts to describe the context of IDSR introduction and implementation, and the barriers surrounding it. Despite the adoption of the IDSR framework, Liberia failed to secure the resources-human, logistical, and financial-to support effective implementation over the 10-year period. Documents and interview reports demonstrate numerous challenges prior to Ebola: the surveillance system lacked key components of IDSR including laboratory testing capacity, disease reporting, risk communication, community engagement, and staff supervision systems. Insufficient financial support and an abundance of vertical programs further impeded progress. In-depth accounts by donors and key governmental informants demonstrate that although the system had a role in detecting Ebola in Liberia, it could not respond effectively to control the disease. Our findings suggest that post-war, Liberia's health system intended to prioritize epidemic preparedness and response with the adoption of IDSR. However, insufficient investment and systems development meant IDSR was not well implemented, leaving the country vulnerable to the devastating impact of the Ebola epidemic.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
In the immediate aftermath of a 14-year civil conflict that disrupted the health system, Liberia adopted the internationally recommended integrated disease surveillance and response (IDSR) strategy in 2004. Despite this, Liberia was among the three West African countries ravaged by the worst Ebola epidemic in history from 2014 to 2016. This paper describes successes, failures, strengths, and weaknesses in the development, adoption, and implementation of IDSR following the civil war and up until the outbreak of Ebola, from 2004 to early 2014.
METHODS
We reviewed 112 official Government documents and peer-reviewed articles and conducted 29 in-depth interviews with key informants from December 2021 to March 2022 to gain perspectives on IDSR in the post-conflict and pre-Ebola era in Liberia. We assessed the core and supportive functions of IDSR, such as notification of priority diseases, confirmation, reporting, analysis, investigation, response, feedback, monitoring, staff training, supervision, communication, and financial resources. Data were triangulated and presented via emerging themes and in-depth accounts to describe the context of IDSR introduction and implementation, and the barriers surrounding it.
RESULTS
Despite the adoption of the IDSR framework, Liberia failed to secure the resources-human, logistical, and financial-to support effective implementation over the 10-year period. Documents and interview reports demonstrate numerous challenges prior to Ebola: the surveillance system lacked key components of IDSR including laboratory testing capacity, disease reporting, risk communication, community engagement, and staff supervision systems. Insufficient financial support and an abundance of vertical programs further impeded progress. In-depth accounts by donors and key governmental informants demonstrate that although the system had a role in detecting Ebola in Liberia, it could not respond effectively to control the disease.
CONCLUSION
Our findings suggest that post-war, Liberia's health system intended to prioritize epidemic preparedness and response with the adoption of IDSR. However, insufficient investment and systems development meant IDSR was not well implemented, leaving the country vulnerable to the devastating impact of the Ebola epidemic.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37880607
doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-17006-7
pii: 10.1186/s12889-023-17006-7
pmc: PMC10601278
doi:
Types de publication
Review
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2093Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
Wkly Epidemiol Rec. 1996 Oct 18;71(42):313-8
pubmed: 8937256
BMJ Glob Health. 2019 Jul 3;4(4):e001427
pubmed: 31354972
BMC Public Health. 2019 Apr 2;19(1):364
pubmed: 30940125
Pan Afr Med J. 2022 Jun 17;42(Suppl 1):13
pubmed: 36158932
Biosecur Bioterror. 2013 Sep;11(3):163-9
pubmed: 24041192
BMC Public Health. 2019 Jan 9;19(1):46
pubmed: 30626358
J Adv Nurs. 1997 Sep;26(3):623-30
pubmed: 9378886
Wkly Epidemiol Rec. 1997 Aug 1;72(31):229-35
pubmed: 9260522
Wkly Epidemiol Rec. 1996 Oct 18;71(42):320
pubmed: 8937257
Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2022 Feb;16(1):333-340
pubmed: 33004102
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 21;18(1):148
pubmed: 30463515