DHB 2006/07 - Health Systems Trust

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Section A: Indicator Comparisons by District Metro View Coverage in the metro districts was disappointing with all three Gauteng metro districts achieving coverage levels of below 50%. The City of Cape Town, although relatively high at over 80% still needs to do much more to achieve 95%. Figure 75: Nevirapine uptake rate among babies born to HIV+ve women by metro district, 2006/07 Nevirapine uptake rate among babies born to HIV+ve women, 2006/07 South Africa Metro average City of Cape Town eThekwini Nelson Mandela Bay Metro Ekurhuleni City of Johannesburg City of Tshwane EC FS GP KZN LP MP NC NW WC SA 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Percentage Rural Nodes Nevirapine coverage to infants in the rural node districts varied widely from 9% in Chris Hani (EC) to 68% in the Central Karoo (WC). Coverage in the four Eastern Cape rural nodes was particularly poor with all four being below 40%. None of the rural nodes achieved a coverage of above 70%. As with the metro districts, significant improvement will be needed to meet the target of the National Strategic Plan. Figure 76: Nevirapine uptake rate among babies born to HIV+ve women by rural district, 2006/07 Nevirapine uptake rate among babies born to HIV+ve women, 2006/07 South Africa ISRDP average Central Karoo Kgalagadi Ugu Thabo Mofutsanyane Zululand Umzinyathi Greater Sekhukhune Umkhanyakude O.R. Tambo Ukhahlamba Alfred Nzo Chris Hani EC FS GP KZN LP MP NC NW WC SA 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Percentage THE DHIS INDICATORS PRESENTED HERE ARE AS RECEIVED FROM THE NATIONAL DHIS AND HAVE NOT BEEN ALTERED BY THE AUTHORS OR HST 81
Section A: Indicator Comparisons by District Change in Nevirapine coverage to babies born to HIV+ve women This indicator showed the largest change from 2005/06 to 2006/07 with all districts except five experiencing a decrease from the previous period. Decreases were noted across all of the metro districts and all of the rural node districts. It is important to note that in 2005/06, 31 districts reported coverage rates of 90% or above with a number of districts reporting coverage of over 100%. The decreases seen in 2006/07 probably reflect improvements in the accuracy of the data rather than true decreases in coverage. This is especially true of those districts with the largest decreases (e.g. Alfred Nzo and Ukhahlamba) which also had the highest coverage rates of well above 100% in the previous period. It will be important to monitor this indicator as the ARV regimen for infants changes to determine if this leads to improvements in both the quality of data and coverage. Figure 77: Change in nevirapine uptake rate among babies born to HIV+ve women by district, 2005/05 - 2006/07 Change in Nevirapine uptake rate among babies born to HIV+ve women, 2005/06 - 2006/07 South Africa Siyanda Uthukela Ehlanzeni Nkangala Gert Sibande Namakwa Amathole City of Cape Town Cape Winelands Nelson Mandela Bay Metro Eden West Coast Pixley ka Seme Overberg Central Karoo Frances Baard Umkhanyakude iLembe Uthungulu eThekwini Kgalagadi Mopani Ugu Motheo Greater Sekhukhune Thabo Mofutsanyane Umzinyathi Capricorn Central Vhembe Sedibeng Zululand Waterberg Xhariep Southern O.R. Tambo Bojanala Lejweleputswa Cacadu Sisonke Metsweding Bophirima Ekurhuleni UMgungundlovu Amajuba Fezile Dabi City of Tshwane Chris Hani City of Johannesburg West Rand Alfred Nzo Ukhahlamba No data -207.5 EC FS GP KZN LP MP NC NW WC SA -160 -120 -80 -40 0 40 80 Percentage 82 THE DHIS INDICATORS PRESENTED HERE ARE AS RECEIVED FROM THE NATIONAL DHIS AND HAVE NOT BEEN ALTERED BY THE AUTHORS OR HST
Page 1 and 2:
0 100 200 300 400 500 2006/07
Page 3 and 4:
Team for the Preparation of the Dis
Page 5 and 6:
Section B - District and province p
Page 7 and 8:
Foreword The District Health Barome
Page 9 and 10:
Variables included in the analysis
Page 11 and 12:
Data quality varies for a number of
Page 13 and 14:
Figure A: Provincial values affecte
Page 15 and 16:
Section A: Indicator Comparisons by
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44: Section A: Indicator Comparisons by
Page 93: Section A: Indicator Comparisons by
Page 139 and 140: 126 Indicator Type Demographic and
Page 141 and 142: Section B: District and Province Pr
Page 143 and 144: Section B: District and Province Pr
Page 145 and 146:
Section B: District and Province Pr
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Appendices Appendix 2 Deprivation I
Page 217 and 218:
Appendices Interpreting negative an
Page 219 and 220:
Appendices Appendix 4: Indicator De
Page 221 and 222:
Appendices Group ``Type Level Indic
Page 223 and 224:
Appendices Group ``Type Level Indic
show all

DHB 2006/07 - Health Systems Trust

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?