|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
Sexually
Transmitted Diseases > Program Guidelines > Surveillance and Data Management
Sections on this page:
EVALUATION AND QUALITY ASSURANCEThe overall purpose of evaluating STD surveillance is to promote the most effective use of health resources. The most important steps in evaluating a surveillance system are a) describing the health events under surveillance; b) stating explicitly the objectives of the system; and c) describing how the system has actually been used to help prevent and control STDs. These three steps begin to evaluate a program's surveillance system properly and help to determine areas where improvement may be needed. The following sections provide more specific information for the proper evaluation of STD surveillance activities. For more detailed information on evaluating surveillance systems, see Guidelines for Evaluating Surveillance, MMWR, May 6, 1988. The surveillance attributes described in the MMWR should be used as the basis for evaluation. Where systems fall short, corrective action is needed until high quality STD surveillance systems are in place. Recommendation
All prevalence monitoring programs should have written protocols that specify data quality control procedures. Many Regional Infertility Prevention Programs, for example, already have data quality assurance programs in place to evaluate validity, completeness, and timeliness. Data quality assurance procedures should be documented and the results of data quality assurance activities carefully monitored. Specific surveillance performance indicators, (e.g., reporting lag time), should be established and monitored at regular, defined intervals. Periodically, data quality reports should be distributed to providers and laboratories to provide feedback on reporting performance. Recommendation
Evaluation of the Reactor Grid The reactor grid is a tool employed by STD prevention programs to prioritize incoming reactive serologic tests for syphilis (STS). Reactive serologic titers are categorized by age group, sex, and test type or titer levels and are separated for follow-up based on likelihood of yielding a case of untreated, infectious syphilis. They are program specific and may differ from one program to another because they are dependent on current and past epidemiologic trends of syphilis in the local program. Grids should be periodically evaluated to confirm that they remain sufficiently sensitive to ensure that early syphilis cases are not being missed. (See Appendix S-B for example.) Recommendation
Page last modified: August 16, 2007 Page last reviewed: August 16, 2007 Historical Document Content Source: Division of STD Prevention, National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention |
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||