ABSTRACT
Resumen Introducción: La pandemia por el Virus de Inmunodeficiencia Humana (VIH) y el Síndrome de Inmunodeficiencia Adquirida (SIDA) han generado numerosas pérdidas humanas, deterioro de la calidad de vida y consecuencias económicas negativas. Se han implementado programas de prevención para fortalecer el diagnóstico temprano y frenar la transición del VIH al SIDA. Objetivo: Hacer seguimiento de la notificación de VIH-SIDA para evaluar los atributos cualitativos y cuantitativos, de acuerdo con los procesos establecidos para la notificación al SIVIGILA, en Caquetá, Colombia. Métodos: Fue utilizada metodología de evaluación de sistemas de vigilancia de los CDC. Para evaluar los atributos cualitativos se realizaron encuestas virtuales a 47 responsables del sistema en diferentes entes territoriales. Para evaluar los atributos se revisaron documentos y bases de datos. Se realizó análisis cualitativos mediante triangulación en Epi-info y análisis cuantitativos usando medidas de frecuencia. Resultados: a)Simplicidad: es fácil el diligenciamiento de registros; b)Flexibilidad: el subsistema ha tenido diferentes cambios en definición de caso e inclusión de variables; c)Aceptabilidad: se reconoce la importancia de la vigilancia de VIH - SIDA y Mortalidad por SIDA; d) Oportunidad: No es oportuno, no se tiene una periodicidad establecida para el análisis de la información; e)Representatividad: no representan el total de los casos del territorio; f)Utilidad: el subsistema permite formulación de políticas públicas; g) Calidad: hubo 20 casos repetidos; h) Sensibilidad: no capta todas las mortalidades.
Abstract Introduction: HIV/AIDS is a global pandemic that has generated numerous human losses, life's quality deterioration, and unfavorable economic consequences. Several prevention programs have been implemented to strengthen early diagnosis and stop the transition from HIV to AIDS. Objective: To evaluate and follow-up on the qualitative and quantitative attributes of the HIV-AIDS notification process according to the established procedure of notification to the SIVIGILA in Caqueta, Colombia. Methods: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's methodology was used for evaluating the subsystem. Virtual surveys were carried out in 47 people in charge of the system in different territorial entities, and documents and databases were reviewed to examine qualitative attributes. In terms of analysis, triangulation in Epi-info was made in qualitative aspects, and frequency measurements were used in quantitative aspects. Results: The results are divided into eight categories. a)Simplicity: it is easy to complete the records. b)Flexibility: the subsystem has had different changes in terms of case definition and the inclusion of variables. c)Acceptability: it is recognized the importance of monitoring HIV - AIDS and AIDS Mortality. d)Opportunity: It is not opportune; there is no periodicity for the information analysis. e)Representativeness: the total number of cases in the territory is not represented. f)Utility: the subsystem allows the formulation of public policies. g)Quality: there were 20 repeated cases. h)Sensibility: all mortalities are not taken into account.
Subject(s)
Humans , Policy Making , Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome , HIV , Epidemiological Monitoring , Quality of Life , Colombia , Aftercare , Evaluation Studies as Topic , PandemicsABSTRACT
Mitigation policy and regulatory frameworks are consistent in their strong support for the mitigation hierarchy of: (1) avoiding impacts, (2) minimizing impacts, and then (3) offsetting/compensating for residual impacts. While mitigation frameworks require developers to avoid, minimize and restore biodiversity on-site before considering an offset for residual impacts, there is a lack of quantitative guidance for this decision-making process. What are the criteria for requiring impacts be avoided altogether? Here we examine how conservation planning can guide the application of the mitigation hierarchy to address this issue. In support of the Colombian government's aim to improve siting and mitigation practices for planned development, we examined five pilot projects in landscapes expected to experience significant increases in mining, petroleum and/or infrastructure development. By blending landscape-level conservation planning with application of the mitigation hierarchy, we can proactively identify where proposed development and conservation priorities would be in conflict and where impacts should be avoided. The approach we outline here has been adopted by the Colombian Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development to guide licensing decisions, avoid piecemeal licensing, and promote mitigation decisions that maintain landscape condition.
