Rapid Fire Australian Epidemiology Association ASM 2018

Epidemic intelligence needs of stakeholders in the Asia-Pacific region, 2017 (#132)

Aurysia Hii 1 , Abrar Ahmad Chughtai 2 , Tambri Housen 1 , Salanieta Saketa 3 , Mohana Priya Kunasekaran 2 , Feroza Sulaiman 2 , NK Semara Yanti 2 , Chandini Raina MacIntyre 2 4
  1. National Centre for Epidemiology & Population Health, Research School of Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia
  2. School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  3. Research Evidence and Information Programme, Public Health Division, Pacific Community, Suva, Fiji
  4. College of Public Service and Community Solutions, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States

Background: Global surveillance systems are crucial for early detection, assessment and response to public health threats. A new epidemic observatory, Epi-watch is being developed to monitor and provide critical analysis of global outbreaks and epidemics of public health significance.

Aim: To inform the development of Epi-watch, we sought to understand the global outbreak surveillance needs of stakeholders involved in epidemic response and surveillance in the Asia-Pacific region.

Methods: We designed an online semi-structured stakeholder questionnaire. Purposive and snowball sampling methods were used to identify 128 participants who use epidemic intelligence and outbreak alert services in their work in government and non-government organisations in selected countries in the Asia-Pacific region. 

Results: All respondents (N=91) agreed that it was important to remain up to date with global outbreaks. The main reason for following outbreak news was as an early warning for serious epidemics (83/91; 91%). Mainstream media and specialist internet sources such as WHO (n=54/91; 59%), ProMED-mail (n=45/91; 49%) and CDC (n=31/91; 34%) were the most common sources for global outbreak news, while use of rapid intelligence services such as HealthMap were less common (n=9/91; 10%).  Only 51% (46/91) of respondents thought their sources of outbreak news were timely and sufficient for their needs. Not enough critical appraisal (38/91; 42%) and lack of time to read/watch/listen to information (36/91; 40%) were reported as limitations of outbreak sources.

Conclusion: Users identified a need for more timely and reliable epidemic intelligence. Better methods to deliver rapid epidemic intelligence to end-users should be explored.