Assessment of the infectious diseases surveillance system of the Republic of Armenia: an example of surveillance in the Republics of the former Soviet Union

BACKGROUND: Before 1991, the infectious diseases surveillance systems (IDSS) of the former Soviet Union (FSU) were centrally planned in Moscow. The dissolution of the FSU resulted in economic stresses on public health infrastructure. At the request of seven FSU Ministries of Health, we performed assessments of the IDSS designed to guide reform. The assessment of the Armenian infectious diseases surveillance system (AIDSS) is presented here as a prototype. DISCUSSION: We performed qualitative assessments using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for evaluating surveillance systems. Until 1996, the AIDSS collected aggregate and case-based data on 64 infectious diseases. It collected information on diseases of low pathogenicity (e.g., pediculosis) and those with no public health intervention (e.g., infectious mononucleosis). The specificity was poor because of the lack of case definitions. Most cases were investigated using a lengthy, non-disease-specific case-report form Armenian public health officials analyzed data descriptively and reported data upward from the local to national level, with little feedback. Information was not shared across vertical programs. Reform should focus on enhancing usefulness, efficiency, and effectiveness by reducing the quantity of data collected and revising reporting procedures and information types; improving the quality, analyses, and use of data at different levels; reducing system operations costs; and improving communications to reporting sources. These recommendations are generalizable to other FSU republics. SUMMARY: The AIDSS was complex and sensitive, yet costly and inefficient. The flexibility, representativeness, and timeliness were good because of a comprehensive health-care system and compulsory reporting. Some data were questionable and some had no utility

Determinants of self-rated health in women: a population-based study in Armavir Marz, Armenia, 2001 & 2004

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The former soviet Republic of Armenia entered a turbulent and long-lasting economic transition when it declared its independence in 1991. This analysis sought to identify the determinants of poor self-rated health as an indirect measure of health status and mortality prognosis in an adult female population during a period of socio-economic transition in Armenia.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Differences in self-rated health in women respondents were analyzed along three main dimensions: social, behavioral/attitudinal, and psychological. The data used were generated from cross-sectional household health surveys conducted in Armavir <it>marz </it>in 2001 and 2004. The surveys utilized the same instruments and study design (probability proportional to size, multistage cluster sampling with a combination of interviewer-administered and self-administered surveys) and generated two independent samples of households representative of Armavir <it>marz</it>. Binary logistic regression models with self-rated health as the outcome were fitted to the 2001 and 2004 datasets and a combined 2001/2004 dataset.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Overall, 2 038 women aged 18 and over participated in the two surveys (1 019 in each). The rate of perceived "poor" health was relatively high in both surveys: 38.1% in 2001 and 27.0% in 2004. The sets of independent predictors of poor self-rated health were similar in all three models and included severe and moderate material deprivation, probable and possible depression, low level of education, and having ever smoked. These predictors mediated the effect of women's economic activity (including unemployment), ethnicity, low access to/utilization of healthcare services, and living alone on self-rated health.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Material deprivation was the most influential predictor of self-rated health. Thus, social reforms to decrease the gap between the rich and poor are recommended as a powerful tool for reducing health inequalities and improving the health status of the population.</p

Spending of HIV resources in Asia and Eastern Europe: systematic review reveals the need to shift funding allocations towards priority populations

Introduction: It is increasingly important to prioritize the most cost-effective HIV interventions. We sought to summarize the evidence on which types of interventions provide the best value for money in regions with concentrated HIV epidemics. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature reporting measurements of cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit for HIV/AIDS interventions in Asia and Eastern Europe. We also collated HIV/AIDS spending assessment data from case-study countries in the region. Results: We identified 91 studies for inclusion, 47 of which were from peer-reviewed journals. Generally, in concentrated settings, prevention of mother-to-child transmission programmes and prevention programmes targeting people who inject drugs and sex workers had lower incremental cost-effectiveness ratios than programmes aimed at the general population. The few studies evaluating programmes targeting men who have sex with men indicate moderate cost-effectiveness. Collation of prevention programme spending data from 12 countries in the region (none of which had generalized epidemics) indicated that resources for the general population/non-targeted was greater than 30% for eight countries and greater than 50% for five countries. Conclusions: There is a misalignment between national spending on HIV/AIDS responses and the most affected populations across the region. In concentrated epidemics, scarce funding should be directed more towards most-at-risk populations. Reaching consensus on general principles of cost-effectiveness of programmes by epidemic settings is difficult due to inconsistent evaluation approaches. Adopting a standard costing, impact evaluation, benefits calculation, analysis and reporting framework would enable cross comparisons and improve HIV resource prioritization and allocation.Andrew P Craig, Hla-Hla Thein, Lei Zhang, Richard T Gray, Klara Henderson, David Wilson, Marelize Gorgens, and David P Wilso