ISDS Annual Conference Proceedings 2017. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-
Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), permitting all non-commercial use, distribution,  
and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

ISDS 2016 Conference Abstracts

Successful implementation of electronic disease 
reporting in Georgia
Lia Sanodze*1, Naile Malakmadze2, Rusudan Chlikadze1, Maka Tsilosani1, 
Tamar Teimurazishvili1, Tsira Napetvaridze3, Natia Kartskhia3 and Khatuna Zakhashvili1
1National Center for Disease Control and Public Health, Tbilisi, Georgia; 2Northrop Grumman, Atlanta, GA, USA; 3National Food 
Agency of Georgia, Tbilisi, Georgia

Objective
The objective of this study was to evaluate several aspects of the 

electronic disease reporting system and its abilities used in Georgia. 
Also, the study assessed if the system abilities are tailored to the 
national surveillance requirements. User attitudes (system strength 
and weaknesses) toward the system was also surveyed.

Introduction
The Ministry of Health of Georgia accepted the Electronic 

Integrated Disease Surveillance System (EIDSS) as an official 
disease reporting system in 2012. The Georgian government adopted 
electronic reporting for both veterinary and human diseases in 
2015. We conducted a comparative assessment of progress in the 
implementation of electronic reporting.

Methods
A face-to-face initial survey was conducted in 2012, a follow-up 

survey (through telephone interviews) was performed in 2016. The 
initial survey was conducted in regions that had EIDSS installed 
and the follow-up survey was conducted in all regions. Standardized 
questionnaires were used and data was analyzed in Epi Info.

Results
Out of 450 trained EIDSS users, 32% were interviewed in the 

initial survey and 25% (of 550) EIDSS trained users were interviewed 
in the follow-up survey. Of 147 respondents in the initial survey and 
138 in the follow-up survey, 44% and 79%, believed that they were 
using EIDSS effectively, respectively. The follow-up survey showed 
a 23% increase in respondents who acknowledge an improvement of 
the electronic reporting; acceptance of EIDSS increased from 80.3% 
to 97.8%. Of those interviewed in the follow-up survey, 19.7% 
mentioned that the main success in development of the system is due 
to improved collaboration between institutes. However, 17.36% of the 
respondents in the follow-up survey reported non-sufficient quality 
data.

Conclusions
Our study suggests that the acceptance and use of EIDSS has 

noticeably improved, indicating the successful implementation of 
electronic reporting. Recommendations have been made to further 
improve the data quality by conducting regular data cleaning and 
additional user training. We recommend the continuation of EIDSS 
training.

Keywords
EIDSS; Electronic reporting; Implementation; Assessment; 
Government regulation

Acknowledgments
Participation in this conference was made possible by financial support 
provided by the US Defense Threat Reduction Agency. The findings, 
opinions and views expressed herein belong to the authors and do not 
reflect an official position of the Department of the Army, Department of 
Defense, or the US Government, or any other organization listed.

*Lia Sanodze
E-mail: Lia.Sanodze@gmail.com

Online Journal of Public Health Informatics * ISSN 1947-2579 * http://ojphi.org * 9(1):e57, 2017