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

Abstract

A reliable livestock disease surveillance system should detect changes in health events whenever they occur. Such a system ought to be evaluated regularly to ensure it provides valuable information in an efficient manner. Thus, a cross-sectional study was carried out in 2017 to assess eight attributes of the livestock disease surveillance systems in Pallisa and Kumi districts, Uganda. A total of 772 livestock farmers were interviewed to evaluate the surveillance system at their level, using a structured questionnaire. Guided interviews were also carried out with 13 key informants who included all veterinary staff at the districts and sub-county administrative units, as well as two officials at the Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF). The stakeholders interviewed at the three different levels of the livestock diseases surveillance system perceived the system as useful, with ability to detect epidemics and initiate their control if they occurred. The surveillance system was perceived to be considerably representative, sensitive and acceptable, with the ability to generate data of good quality. However, key emerging issues that need improvement were noted. These included poor laboratory diagnostic services, inability to work within the means of available resources, slow data transmission and feedback, and nonspecific surveillance forms leading to poor quality of data collected. Poor communication along the surveillance system chain and inadequate staffing were noted as the major challenges faced by the surveillance system in the two districts. Although perceived to be functional, the livestock surveillance requires improvements for efficient disease detection and control. For better performance, the surveillance system could be strengthened by establishing and equipping laboratories for efficient confirmatory diagnosis of diseases; adjusting to work within the means of available resources; improving the reporting process through quick data transmission and quick feedback and designing precise surveillance form to improve quality of data collected.

Towards an Integrated Mobile Technology on Animal Disease Surveillance Framework in Tanzania: A Systematic Review

“…The community-based animal health workers and Field veterinarians use smartphones installed the APPs for collecting field data (FAO, 2015; E. . However, delay of disease reporting cases is still a challenge because they could not capture surveillance data directly from livestock keepers who are at the grass-root of the animal diseases reporting chain (Namayanja et al, 2019a). These two mobile APPs deny livestock keepers to communicate and receive animal disease-related information due to lack of access.…”

“…These two mobile APPs deny livestock keepers to communicate and receive animal disease-related information due to lack of access. However, other studies emphasized that livestock keepers should be the primary source of animal diseases information because sickness always originates with their animals (Namayanja et al, 2019a). The EMA-i and Afyadata can be improved by adopting some of the functionalities of similar APPs available globally, such as Mobile phone-based syndromic surveillance systems for early detection and control of livestock diseases available in Kenya and Mobile phone-based Infectious Disease Surveillance systems in Sri Lanka (Robertson et al, 2010) (Namayanja et al, 2019b).…”

“…However, other studies emphasized that livestock keepers should be the primary source of animal diseases information because sickness always originates with their animals (Namayanja et al, 2019a). The EMA-i and Afyadata can be improved by adopting some of the functionalities of similar APPs available globally, such as Mobile phone-based syndromic surveillance systems for early detection and control of livestock diseases available in Kenya and Mobile phone-based Infectious Disease Surveillance systems in Sri Lanka (Robertson et al, 2010) (Namayanja et al, 2019b). Regardless of other valuable functionalities, the APPs still failed to accommodate livestock keepers among the users (Robertson et al, 2010;Wamwere-Njoroge et al, 2019).…”

“…Hence, the literature of the current animal disease surveillance systems in the country and other related materials worldwide were reviewed, including surveillance systems situation in the country, other existing surveillance systems globally, and livestock diseases prediction models. Livestock keepers are at the grass-root of animals' disease reporting chain, and diseases start from their animals (Namayanja et al, 2019a). Therefore, this study also reviewed Tanzanian livestock keepers demographic data in line with their capability to report and receive animal diseaserelated information, realizing their importance in the animals' diseases reporting chain (Namayanja et al, 2019a).…”

“…Livestock keepers are at the grass-root of animals' disease reporting chain, and diseases start from their animals (Namayanja et al, 2019a). Therefore, this study also reviewed Tanzanian livestock keepers demographic data in line with their capability to report and receive animal diseaserelated information, realizing their importance in the animals' diseases reporting chain (Namayanja et al, 2019a). Livestock demographic data enables the review to suggest suitable technology for sharing animal diseases related information/data in time between livestock keepers and toplevel stakeholders such as Field, District, Regional, Zonal and National Veterinarian officers, researchers and laboratories.…”