• workshop

    Meeting on Dengue Surveillance: New Paradigms and Innovations

March 27-28, 2014 - Mexico City (Mexico)

Accurate and effective surveillance of dengue is fundamental to measuring the burden of dengue disease and, ultimately, to improving its control. The mission of the Partnership for Dengue Control (PDC) is to promote development and implementation of innovative, integrated, synergistic approaches for the prevention and control of dengue. The purpose of this 2-day meeting was to bring together a diverse group of experts, with representatives from universities, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), health agencies, and private sector companies, to discuss and address key issues related to dengue surveillance in the context of the limitations of the current systems and the future introduction of new tools for dengue control.

Taking integrated action to improve surveillance

This workshop looked at ways to improve both disease and vector surveillance. Vaccine, vector, laboratory, epidemiology and public health specialists reviewed the current dengue control situation and laboratory diagnostic techniques. The participants discussed areas for future development, such as more robust surveillance systems and new intervention tools, as well as the idea of introducing surveillance to areas that do not currently have systems in place, with a focus on Africa.

Advancing the research agenda

Experts at the workshop discussed potential items for the operational research agenda in the fields of vector control, surveillance and diagnostics. They agreed on a general need to design key messages and initiatives for targeted audiences. In the context of the introduction of a dengue vaccine and the emergence of new tools, they emphasized the importance of developing advocacy and communication roadmaps.

Workshop outcomes

Experts at the workshop discussed potential items for the operational research agenda in the fields of vector control, surveillance and diagnostics. They agreed on a general need to design key messages and initiatives for targeted audiences. In the context of the introduction of a dengue vaccine and the emergence of new tools, they emphasized the importance of developing advocacy and communication roadmaps.

Workshop outcomes

Several recommendations were developed in support of a global strategy for dengue control:

  • Adopt a combined approach to disease surveillance to improve data quality;
  • Focus more on adult mosquitoes (rather than larvae and pupae);
  • Ensure standardized laboratory methods for diagnostic testing supported by robust quality controls, guidance and training;
  • Harness new technologies to detect dengue outbreaks and febrile illness faster;
  • Increase awareness through training programs for the healthcare community and the public;
  • Build on existing polio and influenza infrastructure to improve surveillance;
  • Fully engage all stakeholders by collecting, analyzing and presenting high quality data;
  • Organize regular meetings between experts in the vaccine, pesticide and vector control communities;
  • Make developing and implementing sound training programs a key priority.

Supporting PDC’s integrated approach and long-term strategy

PDC is ready to engage with several partners to improve integration of laboratory and disease surveillance, in particular focusing on more sensitive and rapid diagnostic tests. Another key factor to improve dengue surveillance is enhanced data and information sharing.

Speakers & Participants

  • Kwasi Amfo, Takeda
  • Miguel Betancourt, Carlos Slim Foundation
  • Ana Carvalho, Sabin Vaccine Institute
  • José Ramos Castañeda, Instituto Nacional de Salud Publica
  • Catherine Dutel, PDC
  • Héctor Gomez-Dantes, Instituto Nacional de Salud Publica
  • Duane Gubler, PDC / Duke University
  • Maria Guzman, PAHO/ WHO, Tropical Medicine Institute ‘Pedro Kouri’
  • Scott Halstead, Dengue Vaccine Initiative
  • Eva Harris, University of Berkeley
  • Elizabeth Hunsperger, CDC
  • Dennis Israelsky, Stanford University
  • Jacqueline Kyung Ah Lim, IVI
  • Andrew Lane, LANE medical writing services
  • Arturo Losoya, Bayer
  • Aurélie Malecot-Chabanel, PDC / Alcimed
  • Harold Margolis, CDC
  • Amy Morrison, University of California
  • Ricardo Palacios, Instituto Butantan
  • Scott Ritchie, James Cook University
  • Elsa Sarti, Sanofi Pasteur
  • Tom W. Scott, University of California
  • Donald Shepard, Brandeis University
  • João Bosco Siqueira, Federal University of Goias
  • Mark Smolinsky, Skoll Global Threats
  • Rémy Teyssou, PDC
  • Georges Thiry, DVI
  • Eduardo Andres Undurraga, Brandeis University
  • Steve Waterman, CDC

Program – Day 1

08h30 – 14h30

 

 

 

 

 

 

Topic 1: Changes in dengue surveillance in the context of the introduction of new tools for control

Plenary: State of the art disease surveillance (H. Margolis)

Plenary: State of the art vector surveillance (S. Ritchie)

Plenary: Key issues that could affect surveillance results for an integrated disease and vector surveillance system in a country where an integrated control program has been initiated. (S. Ritchie and G. Thiry)

Workshop A: Disease surveillance in the context of vaccine introduction (D. Gubler)

Workshop B: How to perform integrated surveillance (H. Gomez)

Discussion of Topic 1 (H. Gomez)

14h30 – 18h00

 

 

 

 

Topic 2: Laboratory techniques and surveillance

Plenary: State of the art currently available laboratory methods and new approaches for diagnosis and surveillance (E. Harris)

Workshop C: How do we currently use available technology to support disease and vector surveillance? (M. Guzman)

Workshop D: New and innovative technology (E. Harris)

Discussion of Topic 2 (E. Harris)

Program – Day 2

09h00 – 14h30

     

Topic 3: New technologies

Plenary: How new technologies may improve surveillance in areas with and without capacity (M. Smolinski)

Plenary: New technologies for surveillance mapping (T. Scott)

Workshop E: How could social networks help to improve the current surveillance of dengue? (M. Smolinski)

Workshop F: Can we use new technologies (such as specific software for cell phones), for surveillance in remote areas? What are the implications in terms of lay public involvement, but also in terms of sensitivity and specificity? (M. Betancourt)

Discussion of Topic 3 (M. Smolinski)

14h30 – 17h00

   

Topic 4: Surveillance in countries that do not have any system in place

Plenary: State of the art issues in specific contexts – focus on Africa (H. Margolis)

Workshop G: What methodology/indicators should be put in place in countries where nothing exists? (J. Lim and H. Margolis)

Discussion of Topic 4 (H. Margolis)

17h00 – 18h00

Consensus on conclusions from the meeting