National Review Meeting of Metropolitan Surveillance Units Held in Nagpur

**Executive Summary** The National Review Meeting of Metropolitan Surveillance Units (MSUs) was held in Nagpur from January 6-7, 2026, for 20 cities. The purpose was to review progress and enhance urban disease surveillance systems in Tier-I and Tier-II cities, under the theme "Proactive Surveillance, Protected Cities." The meeting concluded with a consensus on strengthening collaborative disease surveillance and public health response. **Key Points / Main Content** * **Meeting Overview:** * A two-day National Review Meeting of MSUs was held in Nagpur on January 6-7, 2026. * The meeting involved 20 cities across the country. * The theme was “Proactive Surveillance, Protected Cities." * Objective: Review progress and strengthen urban disease surveillance systems in Tier-I and Tier-II cities. * **Participants:** * Shri Saurabh Jain, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (MoHFW). * Dr. Ranjan Das, Director, National Centre for Disease Control (NCDC). * Municipal Commissioners from Hyderabad, Shimla, Nagpur and Patna. * Deputy Commissioner from Bhopal Municipal Corporation. * Senior officials from MoHFW, officials from NCDC, MSU Nodal Officers from States and Municipal Corporations. * Experts from NCDC, the World Bank, PATH, AIIMS Nagpur, Municipal Corporations, Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying (DAHD), the wildlife sector, Government Veterinary College, Nagpur, APHO Nagpur, IMA and IAP. * **Deliberations & Technical Sessions:** * Focused on strengthening early warning systems, ensuring timely public health response, and enhancing preparedness in urban settings. * A presentation by the Nagpur MSU on investigation and response to an AES outbreak. * Sharing of best practices by operational MSUs. * Review of progress of priority MSUs. * **Scientific Session:** * A scientific session on “MSUs – A Strategic Investment in Urban Disease Surveillance" highlighted the role of MSUs in collaborative surveillance and multisectoral coordination. * **Preparedness Framework:** * Participants were apprised of the All-Hazard preparedness framework. * Participants were enabled to develop City Emergency Response Plans (All-Hazard Plans). * **Conclusion:** * Meeting concluded with a consensus on the need to strengthen collaborative disease surveillance and public health response in urban areas. **Impact Analysis** **Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (MoHFW)** * **Impact:** The Ministry is responsible for the overall direction and oversight of the MSU program and its effectiveness in strengthening urban public health preparedness. * **Action Required:** Utilize the meeting's findings and outcomes to guide policy and resource allocation for urban disease surveillance. **Metropolitan Surveillance Units (MSUs) and Nodal Officers** * **Impact:** MSUs are central to the implementation of disease surveillance and response at the city level. This is a review of their progress. * **Action Required:** Implement best practices shared during the meeting and strengthen collaborative surveillance and multisectoral coordination. **Urban Populations** * **Impact:** The public health and safety of residents in Tier-I and Tier-II cities are directly affected by the effectiveness of urban disease surveillance and response systems. * **Action Required:** No direct action required, but benefits from enhanced public health preparedness. **Municipal Corporations** * **Impact:** Play a crucial role in urban disease surveillance and response. * **Action Required:** Strengthen preparedness and coordinated response mechanisms for public health emergencies by developing City Emergency Response Plans.

Key Entities Referenced