Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Quality assurance applied to animal disease surveillance systems.
- Journal:
- Revue scientifique et technique (International Office of Epizootics)
- Year:
- 2003
- Authors:
- Salman et al.
- Affiliation:
- Animal Population Health Institute · United States
Plain-English summary
This study talks about the importance of monitoring and surveillance systems for animal health, especially as trade in animals and animal products has increased. A good surveillance system helps detect changes in the health of animal populations early and provides proof that certain diseases are not present or helps understand how widespread a known disease is. The authors outline methods for evaluating the quality of these systems, emphasizing that a clear, fair, and systematic approach is crucial. They also note that reaching agreement on evaluations may require ongoing discussions, especially when it involves trade relationships. Overall, the study highlights that well-organized surveillance systems with clear goals are easier to assess for quality.
Abstract
Monitoring and surveillance systems (MOSS) are essential activities for official Veterinary Services. In addition, the increased trade in animals and animal products over recent years has increased the importance of international disease reporting. A reliable surveillance system is the key to early warning of a change in the health status of any animal population. Such a system is also essential for providing evidence about the absence of diseases or in determining the extent of a disease which is known to be present. The authors discuss a set of methods and approaches for evaluating the quality of surveillance and survey systems. Certain steps are required when assessing the quality of a service or product. Various approaches for quality assessment are available and the suitability of each method depends on the objective of the evaluation. An essential basic requirement is, however, to use an objective, transparent and systematic approach. The evidence collected and the analyses used to reach conclusions must be of such high quality that the results are acceptable to both the management of the MOSS and the assessor. Repeated discussions and negotiations may be necessary to reach consensus, particularly if the judgement affects activities between trading partners. Well-documented MOSS with specified objectives and integrated quality assurance mechanisms are likely to be easier to evaluate.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15884598/