CSwMR

Table 3.28 Availability of malaria services and availability of guidelines, trained staff, and diagnostic capacity in facilities offering malaria services
Among all facilities, the percentages offering malaria diagnosis and/or treatment services and, among facilities offering malaria diagnosis and/or
treatment services, the percentages that have guidelines, trained staff, and diagnostic capacity to support the provision of quality service for malaria,
by background characteristics, Senegal CSSPA 2012-2013
Background
characteristics
Percentage
of all
facilities
offering
malaria
diagnosis
and/or
treatment
services 1
Total
number of
facilities
Guidelines
for
diagnosis
and/or
treatment
of malaria
Guidelines Trained staff Diagnostics
Guidelines
for IPT 2
Staff
trained in
malaria
diagnosis
and/or
treatment 3
Staff
trained in
IPT 4
Malaria
RDT 5
Malaria
microscopy 6
Any malaria
diagnostics 7
Number of
facilities
offering
malaria
diagnosis
and/or
treatment
services
Facility type
Hospital 93 17 69 37 73 51 66 61 75 16
Health center 99 30 80 50 86 53 84 65 92 30
Health post 99 317 87 60 78 53 82 6 84 314
Managing authority
Public 100 302 90 65 82 57 86 11 88 302
Private 93 62 59 20 55 33 56 24 64 58
Region
Dakar 94 71 69 38 68 34 71 23 73 67
Diourbel 100 25 89 42 88 56 95 3 95 25
Fatick 100 22 94 31 100 94 74 12 82 22
Kaffrine 100 14 100 91 62 37 100 6 100 14
Kaolack 100 23 80 61 94 80 69 10 75 23
Kédougou 96 9 89 45 72 50 100 17 100 8
Kolda 100 17 81 57 38 24 43 8 43 17
Louga 100 23 98 75 77 69 68 9 70 23
Matam 100 17 100 75 83 70 94 4 94 17
Saint Louis 100 29 95 85 91 65 91 14 100 29
Sédhiou 100 12 97 66 68 62 86 11 91 12
Tambacounda 100 24 83 61 78 35 100 13 100 24
Thiès 100 48 82 49 84 51 79 15 81 48
Ziguinchor 100 29 86 80 77 51 98 12 98 29
Total 99 364 85 58 78 53 81 13 84 360
Health hut 89 74 67 1 34 6 60 NA 60 66
NA = Not applicable
Note: The indicators presented in this table comprise the staff and training and diagnostic domains for assessing readiness to provide services for
malaria within the health facility assessment methodology proposed by WHO and USAID (2012).
1
This is based on facilities self-reporting that they offer malaria diagnosis and/or treatment services. Facilities offering antenatal care services that
reported that they provide malaria rapid diagnosis tests (RDT) or were found on the day of the survey visit to be conducting such tests at the ANC
service site were counted as offering malaria diagnosis and/or treatment services. Also, facilities offering curative care for sick children where
providers of sick child services were found on the day of the survey to be making diagnosis of malaria or offering treatment for malaria were counted
as offering malaria diagnosis and/or treatment services.
2
Guidelines on intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) of malaria.
3
Facility has at least one interviewed provider of malaria services who reports receiving in-service training on malaria diagnosis and/or treatment
during the 24 months preceding the survey. The training must have involved structured sessions; it does not include individual instruction that a
provider might have received during routine supervision.
4
Facility had at least one interviewed provider of ANC services who reports receiving in-service training on some aspects of IPT during the 24 months
preceding the survey. The training must have involved structured sessions; it does not include individual instruction that a provider might have received
during routine supervision.
5
Facility had unexpired malaria rapid diagnostic test kit available somewhere in the facility.
6
Facility had a functioning microscope with glass slides and relevant stains for malaria microscopy available somewhere in the facility.
7
Facility had either malaria RDT capacity or malaria microscopy capacity.
49