Evaluation on HIV-Related Risk Behavioral Surveillance System among Various Target Populations

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate national HIV-related surveillance system in target population. It was conducted by gathering information on events and find relationship using quantitative and qualitative methods from October 2013 to December 2015. Altogether 2,587 participants were recruited into the study consisted of grade 8 and 11 students, 2 nd year vocational students, employees in workplaces, sex workers and military conscripts as well as administrators and 50 surveillance system staff. The study sites included 10 provinces: Ratchaburi, Chiang Rai, Phayao, Khon Kaen, Udon Thani, Krabi, Phangnga, Chachoengsao, Sa Kaeo and Phetchaburi. The findings were as follow: Input: the surveillance system had been driven by budget, personnel and related projects and activities. Process: success of the system de-pended on activities that contained overlapping and integrated network functions and the coverage of the networks. Output: successful components of behavioral surveillance system comprised amount of data, data quality, access and data utilization. Outcome: change on risky behavior in various target populations happened from data utilization. Findings from questionnaire among 2,587 participants regarding (1) knowledge and awareness on AIDS evaluated using GARPR: only 36% correctly answered all five ques-tions; (2) awareness: 92.9% could answer correctly for using condoms when have sex to prevent HIV; and (3) knowledge on risks and HIV prevention: 90.6% could answer using a condom when having sex to prevent AIDS, 90% could answer that having sex with multiple partners is the risk for HIV infection and 87.3% could answer blood test for HIV before marriage reduces risk of HIV infection. The recommenda-tions were as follow: Input: recruitment of experience staff, creation knowledge on analyses that have the same direction, capability of database building for data collection and the ability of using information and finding instruments for data and knowledge finding and collections are suggested for better input. Process: including works on surveillance system into routine work with clear agenda, working as a team, question creation and change by experts, utilizing information from the system for solving problems in each prov-ince and the country and forum development for sharing and improving questionnaire are key factors on process improvement. Output: reviews on information and data from the surveillance system locally and nationally by local provincial office and the Bureau of Epidemiology should be strengthened.