Abstract

Background:This paper aims to highlight and analyze discrepancies in reporting of deaths due to venomous animals in Brazil, from 2001 to 2015, between two national information systems: The Notifiable Diseases Information System (Sistema de Informação de Agravos de Notificação - SINAN) and the Mortality Information System (Sistema de Informações sobre Mortalidade - SIM).Methods:Descriptive and comparative study of the SINAN and SIM information systems, was conducted via the following steps: collecting the death notices from SINAN and SIM; constructing tables and comparative graphics; and, only in scorpion sting fatalities, analyzing the distribution of deaths by age group as described in the specialized literature.Results:While SINAN identifies strong growth in the number of deaths from scorpion stings, SIM shows greater increase in the number of reported deaths from bee stings, especially in the South and Southeast regions. Notably, bees are the sole etiological agent that received more reports in SIM than in SINAN for every year in the period studied. The age-group distribution of the data on deaths from scorpion stings reinforced the indication of problems occurring in their registration in SINAN, especially since 2007, which may have an effect on analyses based on these data.Conclusion:Comparative analysis of these databases permits identification of important differences between profiles presented by these systems, which have equal relevance for Brazil as a whole and for its regions. These differences may influence the construction of various scenarios.

Highlights

  • This paper aims to highlight and analyze discrepancies in reporting of deaths due to venomous animals in Brazil, from 2001 to 2015, between two national information systems: The Notifiable Diseases Information System (Sistema de Informação de Agravos de Notificação - SINAN) and the Mortality Information System (Sistema de Informações sobre Mortalidade - SIM)

  • The age-group distribution of the data on deaths from scorpion stings reinforced the indication of problems occurring in their registration in SINAN, especially since 2007, which may have an effect on analyses based on these data

  • Comparative analysis of these databases permits identification of important differences between profiles presented by these systems, which have equal relevance for Brazil as a whole and for its regions

Read more

Summary

Introduction

This paper aims to highlight and analyze discrepancies in reporting of deaths due to venomous animals in Brazil, from 2001 to 2015, between two national information systems: The Notifiable Diseases Information System (Sistema de Informação de Agravos de Notificação - SINAN) and the Mortality Information System (Sistema de Informações sobre Mortalidade - SIM). Brazil is one of the countries with the broadest experience in the diagnosis and treatment of envenomings by animals These incidents, while of great interest in various fields of knowledge production and public health policy, are considered part of the group of neglected tropical diseases[1,2,3]. In addition to the Notifiable Diseases Information System (Sistema de Informação de Agravos de Notificação - SINAN)[4], which records, amongst other events, the incidence of treatment by the health services for envenoming, Brazil possesses two other national systems that offer information of related interest: deaths and hospital admissions. Poisoning Information System (Sistema de Informações TóxicoFarmacológicas - SINITOX)[7], which deals only with cases in which the Centers for Toxicological Information and Assistance (Centros de Informação e Assistência Toxicológica - CIATs)[7,8]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.