Cargando…

Coverage of routine reporting on malaria parasitological testing in Kenya, 2015–2016

Background: Following the launch of District Health Information System 2 across facilities in Kenya, more health facilities are now capable of carrying out malaria parasitological testing and reporting data as part of routine health information systems, improving the potential value of routine data...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Maina, Joseph K., Macharia, Peter M., Ouma, Paul O., Snow, Robert W., Okiro, Emelda A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5757226/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29261450
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2017.1413266
_version_ 1783290828320407552
author Maina, Joseph K.
Macharia, Peter M.
Ouma, Paul O.
Snow, Robert W.
Okiro, Emelda A.
author_facet Maina, Joseph K.
Macharia, Peter M.
Ouma, Paul O.
Snow, Robert W.
Okiro, Emelda A.
author_sort Maina, Joseph K.
collection PubMed
description Background: Following the launch of District Health Information System 2 across facilities in Kenya, more health facilities are now capable of carrying out malaria parasitological testing and reporting data as part of routine health information systems, improving the potential value of routine data for accurate and timely tracking of rapidly changing disease epidemiology at fine spatial resolutions. Objectives: This study evaluates the current coverage and completeness of reported malaria parasitological testing data in DHIS2 specifically looking at patterns in geographic coverage of public health facilities in Kenya. Methods: Monthly facility level data on malaria parasitological testing were extracted from Kenya DHIS2 between November 2015 and October 2016. DHIS2 public facilities were matched to a geo-coded master facility list to obtain coordinates. Coverage was defined as the geographic distribution of facilities reporting any data by region. Completeness of reporting was defined as the percentage of facilities reporting any data for the whole 12-month period or for 3, 6 and 9 months. Results: Public health facilities were 5,933 (59%) of 10,090 extracted. Fifty-nine per Cent of the public facilities did not report any data while 36, 29 and 22% facilities had data reported at least 3, 6 and 9 months, respectively. Only 8% of public facilities had data reported for every month. There were proportionately more hospitals (86%) than health centres (76%) and dispensaries/clinics (30%) reporting. There were significant geographic variations in reporting rates. Counties along the malaria endemic coast had the lowest reporting rate with only 1% of facilities reporting consistently for 12 months. Conclusion: Current coverage and completeness of reporting of malaria parasitological diagnosis across Kenya’s public health system remains poor. The usefulness of routine data to improve our understanding of sub-national heterogeneity across Kenya would require significant improvements to the consistency and coverage of data captured by DHIS2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5757226
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57572262018-01-10 Coverage of routine reporting on malaria parasitological testing in Kenya, 2015–2016 Maina, Joseph K. Macharia, Peter M. Ouma, Paul O. Snow, Robert W. Okiro, Emelda A. Glob Health Action Original Article Background: Following the launch of District Health Information System 2 across facilities in Kenya, more health facilities are now capable of carrying out malaria parasitological testing and reporting data as part of routine health information systems, improving the potential value of routine data for accurate and timely tracking of rapidly changing disease epidemiology at fine spatial resolutions. Objectives: This study evaluates the current coverage and completeness of reported malaria parasitological testing data in DHIS2 specifically looking at patterns in geographic coverage of public health facilities in Kenya. Methods: Monthly facility level data on malaria parasitological testing were extracted from Kenya DHIS2 between November 2015 and October 2016. DHIS2 public facilities were matched to a geo-coded master facility list to obtain coordinates. Coverage was defined as the geographic distribution of facilities reporting any data by region. Completeness of reporting was defined as the percentage of facilities reporting any data for the whole 12-month period or for 3, 6 and 9 months. Results: Public health facilities were 5,933 (59%) of 10,090 extracted. Fifty-nine per Cent of the public facilities did not report any data while 36, 29 and 22% facilities had data reported at least 3, 6 and 9 months, respectively. Only 8% of public facilities had data reported for every month. There were proportionately more hospitals (86%) than health centres (76%) and dispensaries/clinics (30%) reporting. There were significant geographic variations in reporting rates. Counties along the malaria endemic coast had the lowest reporting rate with only 1% of facilities reporting consistently for 12 months. Conclusion: Current coverage and completeness of reporting of malaria parasitological diagnosis across Kenya’s public health system remains poor. The usefulness of routine data to improve our understanding of sub-national heterogeneity across Kenya would require significant improvements to the consistency and coverage of data captured by DHIS2. Taylor & Francis 2017-12-20 /pmc/articles/PMC5757226/ /pubmed/29261450 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2017.1413266 Text en © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Maina, Joseph K.
Macharia, Peter M.
Ouma, Paul O.
Snow, Robert W.
Okiro, Emelda A.
Coverage of routine reporting on malaria parasitological testing in Kenya, 2015–2016
title Coverage of routine reporting on malaria parasitological testing in Kenya, 2015–2016
title_full Coverage of routine reporting on malaria parasitological testing in Kenya, 2015–2016
title_fullStr Coverage of routine reporting on malaria parasitological testing in Kenya, 2015–2016
title_full_unstemmed Coverage of routine reporting on malaria parasitological testing in Kenya, 2015–2016
title_short Coverage of routine reporting on malaria parasitological testing in Kenya, 2015–2016
title_sort coverage of routine reporting on malaria parasitological testing in kenya, 2015–2016
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5757226/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29261450
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2017.1413266
work_keys_str_mv AT mainajosephk coverageofroutinereportingonmalariaparasitologicaltestinginkenya20152016
AT machariapeterm coverageofroutinereportingonmalariaparasitologicaltestinginkenya20152016
AT oumapaulo coverageofroutinereportingonmalariaparasitologicaltestinginkenya20152016
AT snowrobertw coverageofroutinereportingonmalariaparasitologicaltestinginkenya20152016
AT okiroemeldaa coverageofroutinereportingonmalariaparasitologicaltestinginkenya20152016