Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 5, 2026
Inducing Meningococcal Meningitis Serogroup C in Mice via Intracisternal Delivery
Published on: November 5, 2019
Evaluation of the surveillance system for invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) in the Netherlands, 2004-2016
Diederik A H Brandwagt1,2,3, Arie van der Ende4, Wilhelmina L M Ruijs5
1Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Postbus 1, 3720 BA, Bilthoven, The Netherlands. dbrandwagt@ggdru.nl.
Background:
Enhanced surveillance for confirmed cases of invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) was introduced in the Netherlands in 2003, in which reference laboratory data (NRLBM) are linked with notification data (OSIRIS). The quality of surveillance information is important for public health decision making. Our objective was to describe the system and evaluate it for data completeness and timeliness.
Methods:
Cases reported in the surveillance system from 2004 to 2016 were included. For the notification data, we used information on serogroup, vaccination status, mortality, and country of infection as indicators for record completeness. Notification times to regional and national level were calculated using the reported dates available in the notification database.
Results:
A total of 2123 cases were reported in the years 2004-2016, of which 1.968 (93%) were reported by the reference laboratory and 1.995 (94%) in the notification system. Of all cases, 1.840 cases (87%) were reported in both systems and could be linked. The serogroup was known in 86% of the notified cases, and was significantly higher (94%) in the years 2013-2016. Information on vaccination status, mortality and country of infection was available in 88, 99 and 97% of notified cases, respectively. Regional notification of cases occurred within one working day for 86% of cases and 98% were notified nationally within three days.
Conclusions:
A well performing IMD surveillance system was demonstrated and serogroup completeness has improved over the years. Underlining the need for reporting to both the clinical and laboratory surveillance system remains important to further improve the overall performance in supporting public health response and vaccination policy.
