Methodology for the assessment of brucellosis management practices and its vaccination campaign: example in two Argentine districts

Table 4 Questionnaire for Local Sanitary Entities (LSE) officials

Items			Experts’ opinion		Weighting
Items	Ideal	Not ideal	Total [A]	CV	Weighted Factor [B]
The LSE audits the vaccination process	Yes	No	51.0	0.107	0.102
Frequency of LSE audits	Twice per campaign	Other	35.0	0.484	0.070
Aspects audited by the LSE	All of them	None of them	37.0	0.377	0.074
The LSE advertises dates of the vaccination campaign beforehand	Yes	No	30.0	0.440	0.060
The LSE plans the date for vaccination with the farmers beforehand	Yes	No	36.0	0.432	0.072
The LSE controls the temperature at which the vaccine is supplied by the producing laboratories	Yes	No	50.0	0.353	0.100
Temperature at which the vaccine is stored at the LSE	2–8 ° C	Other	55.0	0.203	0.110
The LSE checks the temperature of the fridge in which the vaccines are stored	Yes	No	57.0	0.192	0.114
Frequency of temperature control	Twice a day	Other	37.0	0.454	0.074
The LSE supplies the vaccine to vaccinators in cooled boxes	Yes	No	55.0	0.240	0.110
The LSE receives the surplus of vaccine brought back by vaccinators by the end of the day	Yes	No	22.0	0.565	0.044
The LSE controls the temperature at which the vaccine surpluses are brought	Yes	No	35.0	0.404	0.070

Legend: CV = coefficient of variation [A] Average of points distributed by the experts, per item. [B] Weighted factor per item. This value was obtained after dividing [A] by the total of points distributed by each expert (100 points). The sum of all weighted items equals 1
List of items, possible answers, experts’ opinion and weighting

ISSN: 1746-6148