The Study Of Current Situation Of Report Quality And Influential Factors Of Notifiable Infectious Diseases In 2009

BACKGROUND:The national notifiable infectious diseases reporting system has been running for five years by the end of 2009. We aimed to understand the status of quality and management of the national notifiable infectious diseases reporting and find its influential factors in order to provide scientific basis to improve its quality. A study on data quality of the national notifiable infectious diseases reporting was conducted in 2009, which was based on supervision and inspection on the quality of National Notifiable Diseases Reporting system in 2009, the People's Republic of China Disease Prevention Act and the National Notifiable Diseases Reporting system.OBJECTIVE:Data from the National Notifiable Infectious Diseases Reporting system in 2009 was analyzed in order to understand the status of quality and management of National Notifiable Infectious Diseases Reporting system and find its influential factors in order to provide reference basis to improve its quality.METHODS:Data analysis was conducted on data of supervision and inspection on quality of National Notifiable Infectious Diseases Reporting system in 2009 and data download from China Center for Disease Control and Prevention Information System to analyze the quality of National Notifiable Infectious Diseases Reporting system. EpiData3.0 was used to set up the database and SAS 9.2 was applied for data statistical description and data analysis, sensitivity analysis of BP neural network model was used to determine the main influential factors and their weights.RESULTS:The study found that the rate failed to report the notifiable infectious diseases was 5.13%, the rate of not timely reported was 2.27%, the rate of not timely reviewed was 0.25%,the rate of double cards was 0.01%, the rate of incomplete was 12.84%, the rate of inaccurate was 28.27%, rate of no consistent was 26.23%, the average index was 10.80 and the western region was with the highest rate among all indicators.Analysis of the notifiable infectious disease reporting quality shows that the key influential factor of the failed reporting was medical management; the key influential factor of not timely reported and having card duplication was supervision and inspection of the health administrative department. The key influential factor of eastern region's quality of notifiable infectious diseases was supervision and management of the health administrative department, the key influential factor of central region's quality of infectious diseases was medical training and the key influential factor of western region's quality of infectious diseases was the notifiable infectious diseases reporting management of the medical institute.Sensitivity analysis of comprehensive evaluation of reporting quality shows that reporting network equipment of Center for Disease Control and Prevention (0.70194), supervision and management of Infectious diseases reporting from the health administrative department (0.259726), technical guidance of Center for Disease Control and Prevention (0.250305), routine reporting analysis of special medical staff (0.174478), routine monitoring and management of infectious diseases reporting (0.156089), reporting management of infectious diseases (0.143648), professional and technical training from Center for Disease Control and Prevention (0.140548), the relative contribution of all of above indicators accounting for the total contribution is 82.39%.CONCULSION:1. The national notifiable infectious diseases reporting system has a good integrity and timely reporting but accuracy of reporting need further improved so that we suggest enhancing the management of reporting accuracy.2. The key influential factors of reporting quality of national notifiable infectious diseases include reporting network equipment of Center for Disease Control and Prevention, technical guidance of medical institutions, supervision and management of notifiable infectious diseases reporting from the health administrative department, routine reporting analysis of special medical staff and monitoring and management of infectious diseases reporting3. Quality and management of notifiable infectious diseases reporting exists difference in different regions, eastern and central regions is better than the western region. We suggest strengthen the management of the notifiable infectious diseases reporting in western region, especially the notifiable infectious diseases reporting management of the medical institutions, health administrative departments to strengthen supervision, Center for Disease Control and Prevention providing technical guidance for medical institutions.4. The key influential factors are different from regions, for example, the key influential factors of eastern region is supervision and inspection of the notifiable infectious diseases from the health administrative departments, the key influential factors of central region is medical training, the key influential factors of western region is reporting management of infectious diseases.