Arboviral disease surveillance/clinical staff perceptions

Arboviral disease surveillance/clinical staff perception of factors contributing to the a) success and b) barriers/challenges with respect to case management (ref Q25)

Country	Successes	Barriers
Bangladesh	National Guideline for Dengue & Chikungunya Available	Not all private hospitals follow the guideline
Bhutan	Health workers aware of arboviral prevailing in their areas; Diagnostic tool (RDT) available at all hospitals	Limited capacity of our health workers in clinical management and diagnosis; Rare disease with no funding support
India
Indonesia
Maldives	Close network of surveillance focal points and local and some foreign clinicians. Availability of clinical experts at clinical level to guide doctors at peripheral level. Established referral mechanism	Under reporting of some cases with high turnover rate of doctors
Myanmar	Trained staff Management of cases especially severe cases in the hospital Availability of IEC materials Community participation	Incomplete report on patient location Limited human resources for case management Limited resources for prevention and control materials Less community participation
Nepal	Since the first reporting of dengue cases in the country in 2004, clinical staffs keep dengue as a differential diagnosis of fever cases and perform tests accordingly. The MoHP developed its national guidelines for dengue case management and the latest revised version is of 2019 which is very helpful for the clinicians.	Sometimes due to unavailability and unreliability of rapid diagnostic test kits for dengue, case diagnosis is missed only based upon the clinical evaluation.
Sri Lanka
Thailand		Delayed treatment Self treatment
Timor-Leste