Lessons for surveillance in the 21st century: a historical perspective from the past five millennia

Substandard and Falsified Medicines: Proposed Methods for Case Finding and Sentinel Surveillance

The World Health Organization and others warn that substandard and falsified medicines harm health and waste money, especially in low- and middle-income countries. However, no country has measured the market-wide extent of the problem, and no standardized methods exist to estimate the prevalence of either substandard or falsified medicines. This is, in part, because the task seems overwhelming; medicine markets are huge and diverse, and testing medicines is expensive. Many countries do operate some form of postmarket surveillance of medicine, but their methods and goals differ. There is currently no clear guidance on which surveillance method is most appropriate to meet specific public health goals. In this viewpoint, we aimed to discuss the utility of both case finding and risk-based sentinel surveillance for substandard and falsified medicines, linking each to specific public health goals. We posit that choosing the system most appropriate to the goal, as well as implementing it with a clear understanding of the factors driving the production and sale of substandard and falsified medicines, will allow for surveillance resources to be concentrated most efficiently. We adapted principles used for disease outbreak responses to suggest a case-finding system that uses secondary data to flag poor-quality medicines, proposing risk-based indicators that differ for substandard and falsified medicines. This system potentially offers a cost-effective way of identifying “cases” for market withdrawal, enhanced oversight, or another immediate response. We further proposed a risk-based sentinel surveillance system that concentrates resources on measuring the prevalence of substandard and falsified medicines in the risk clusters where they are most likely to be found. The sentinel surveillance system provides base data for a transparent, spreadsheet-based model for estimating the national prevalence of substandard and falsified medicines. The methods we proposed are based on ongoing work in Indonesia, a large and diverse middle-income country currently aiming to achieve universal health coverage. Both the case finding and the sentinel surveillance system are designed to be adaptable to other resource-constrained settings.

Corrigendum to "The Past, Present, and Future of Public Health Surveillance"

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.6064/2012/875253.].

What Could Be Future Scenarios?-Lessons from the History of Public Health Surveillance for the Future: --A keynote address presented at the 8th World Alliance for Risk Factor Surveillance (WARFS) Global Conference on October 30, 2013, Beijing, China

This article provides insights into the future based on a review of the past and present of public health surveillance-the ongoing systematic collection, analysis, interpretation, and dissemination of health data for the planning, implementation, and evaluation of public health action. Public health surveillance dates back to the first recorded epidemic in 3180 BC in Egypt. A number of lessons and items of interest are summarised from a review of historical perspectives in the past 5,000 years and the current practice of surveillance. Some future scenarios are presented: exploring new frontiers; enhancing computer technology; improving epidemic investigations; improving data collection, analysis, dissemination and use; building on lessons from the past; building capacity; and enhancing global surveillance. It is concluded that learning from the past, reflecting on the present, and planning for the future can further enhance public health surveillance.

The past, present, and future of public health surveillance

This paper provides a review of the past, present, and future of public health surveillance-the ongoing systematic collection, analysis, interpretation, and dissemination of health data for the planning, implementation, and evaluation of public health action. Public health surveillance dates back to the first recorded epidemic in 3180 B.C. in Egypt. Hippocrates (460 B.C.-370 B.C.) coined the terms endemic and epidemic, John Graunt (1620-1674) introduced systematic data analysis, Samuel Pepys (1633-1703) started epidemic field investigation, William Farr (1807-1883) founded the modern concept of surveillance, John Snow (1813-1858) linked data to intervention, and Alexander Langmuir (1910-1993) gave the first comprehensive definition of surveillance. Current theories, principles, and practice of public health surveillance are summarized. A number of surveillance dichotomies, such as epidemiologic surveillance versus public health surveillance, are described. Some future scenarios are presented, while current activities that can affect the future are summarized: exploring new frontiers; enhancing computer technology; improving epidemic investigations; improving data collection, analysis, dissemination, and use; building on lessons from the past; building capacity; enhancing global surveillance. It is concluded that learning from the past, reflecting on the present, and planning for the future can further enhance public health surveillance.