![9
PREVENTION INDICATOR (HIV-PI 2):
BEHAVIOUR CHANGE COMMUNICATION
Most-at-risk populations: prevention programs
Percentage of [most-at-risk population(s)] reached with HIV/AIDS prevention programs.
RATIONALE
Most-at-risk populations are often difficult to reach with HIV/AIDS prevention programs. However, in order to prevent
the spread of HIV/AIDS among these populations as well as into the general population, it is important that they access
these services. This indicator is to assess progress in implementing HIV/AIDS prevention programs for most-at-risk
populations and should be calculated separately for each population that is considered most-at-risk in a given country,
e.g., sex workers, injecting drug users, men who have sex with men.
Note:Countrieswithgeneralizedepidemicsmayalsohaveaconcentratedsub-epidemicamongoneormoremost-at-risk
populations. If so, it would be valuable for them to calculate and report on this indicator for those populations.
DEFINITION OF INDICATOR
Numerator: Number of [most-at-risk population] respondents who have accessed HIV/AIDS prevention programs
during the last 12 months
Denominator: Number of most-at-risk population included in the survey sample or prevalence estimation methods
for the size of the most-at-risk population for the denominator (if the data is being collected through
program monitoring records)
Note: Data collected for this indicator should be disaggregated by gender and age (<25/25+).
Whenever possible, data for most-at-risk populations should be collected through civil society organizations that have
worked closely with this population in the field.
Access to survey respondents as well as the data collected from them must remain confidential.
MEASUREMENT
The data can be collected through special surveys and program monitoring records.
Surveys: Respondents are asked a series of questions about the exposure/use of key HIV prevention services. Depending
on local contexts, the list would include (1) outreach and peer education; (2) exposure to targeted mass media; (3)
STI screening and/or treatment; (4) HIV counseling and testing; (5) substitution therapy and safer injection practices
for IDU.
Accessing and/or surveying most-at-risk populations can be challenging. Consequently, data obtained may not be
based on a representative sample of the national most-at-risk population being surveyed. If there are concerns that the
data is not based on a representative sample, these concerns should be reflected in the interpretation of the survey data.
Where different sources of data exist, the best available estimate should be used. Information on the sample size, the
quality/reliability of the data and any related issues should be included in the report submitted with this indicator.
Program monitoring: records of programs providing the above-mentioned services are compiled and aggregated to
obtain an overall measure of the reach of prevention programs.
When the indicator is based on program data, an attempt to address the issue of double counting during the reference
period should be made. There is a need to ensure that clients served (as opposed to clients-visits) for the same service
or across services are counted.
Different types of services will all count the same in estimating overall service coverage.
➪](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/monitoringevaluation-130506024712-phpapp01/85/Monitoring-and-Evaluation-Toolkit-9-320.jpg)
![70 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex D: Description of Malaria Indicators
IMPACT INDICATOR (MALARIA-II 1):
DEATH RATES ASSOCIATED WITH MALARIA
■
Stable/highly endemic settings: All-cause under-5 mortality (5
q0
), expressed as deaths per 1000 under-fives.
■
Settings with lower malaria endemicity or epidemic malaria: Malaria-attributed deaths reported in all age
groups.
RATIONALE
Mortality is a major component of the burden caused by malaria, and halving malaria-related mortality is the overall
goal of the Roll Back Malaria initiative. Approaches to measuring malaria-related mortality differ between regions,
according to the local endemicity (transmission intensity) of malaria.
Areas of stable malaria transmission
Most countries of sub-Saharan Africa have areas where malaria transmission occurs at a high level for several months
each year; in addition similar areas of stable transmission exist in small focal areas of South-East Asia. In these areas of
stable endemicity, the major burden of malaria occurs in very young children who, because they have not yet developed
adequate clinical immunity, are at highest risk of severe illness and death. Over 80% of global malaria deaths occur in
African children under 5 years of age.
Because the symptoms (such as fever) and signs (such as anemia) are not specific and sensitive for malaria, measuring
malaria-specific mortality in these settings is difficult. Efforts to assess malaria-attributable mortality using a retro-
spective verbal autopsy lack sufficient specificity, especially for young children. Child deaths related to malaria are
frequently concurrent with other common illnesses, rather than directly and solely attributable to malaria. Moreover,
a majority of deaths do not occur in hospitals and are not recorded in national health information systems (HIS), and
these are unlikely to be picked up in vital registration systems.
All-cause under-5 mortality, abbreviated as 5
q0
, i.e. the probability that a live-born child dies before his or her fifth
birthday, is therefore the preferred mortality indicator, because in these settings, about 18% of under-5 mortality
is estimated to be directly attributable to malaria [Rowe et al., 2005], malaria contributes indirectly to many more
under-5 deaths, and successful malaria control using ITNs has been demonstrated to considerably reduce all-cause
under-5 mortality. For proper interpretation, trends in all-cause under-5 mortality must be analyzed alongside trends
in coverage of key malaria interventions (ITN use, prompt effective treatment, and intermittent preventive treatment of
pregnant women), which are commonly measured in the same surveys that provide mortality statistics (see below).
Areas of unstable, low malaria transmission
Residents of areas of low, highly seasonal malaria transmission or areas at risk of malaria epidemics will not have
had enough exposure to acquire any significant level of clinical immunity to malaria. In these areas, all age groups are
at risk of severe illness and death. In many of these settings, a larger proportion of severe malaria cases presents to
health facilities, and malaria-attributed deaths reported in the HIS may provide a reliable indication of malaria-related
mortality. Depending on the population’s access to health care and completeness of HIS reporting, reported malaria
deaths will reflect the total burden of malaria mortality in the population, or a proportion of that from which at least
the time trend in malaria mortality could be inferred. In areas of lower access to health care, or where HIS reporting is
inadequate (such as in complex emergencies), estimations of malaria deaths may be obtained through other methods
such as community surveys or special surveillance sites.
DEFINITION OF INDICATOR – All-cause under-5 mortality (5
q0
)
Numerator: Number of children borne alive who were reported to have died before their fifth birthday
Denominator: Total number of children borne alive (as reported in a survey)](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/monitoringevaluation-130506024712-phpapp01/85/Monitoring-and-Evaluation-Toolkit-70-320.jpg)
![71
MEASUREMENT
In sub-Saharan Africa, where civil death registration is in most countries inadequate, the main source of statistics on
all-cause under-5 mortality are representative, population-based surveys. Notably, the Demographic and Health Surveys
(DHS [ORC Macro]) estimate infant and childhood mortality rates through birth history interviewing of women aged
15-49 years sampled nation-wide through a two-stage cluster design. Besides DHS, UNICEF’s Multiple Cluster Indicator
Surveys (MICS) also provide nationally representative mortality estimates, through a non-birth-history surveying tech-
nique. These two surveys are carried out in an increasing number of developing countries every 3-5 years. The DHS and
MICS data are two of the main sources for the country-by-country under-5 mortality estimation published every year by
UNICEF in the State of the World’s Children Report [UNICEF, 2004; Hill et al., 1999]. This estimation also takes into
account data from censuses, where available, and for some countries, vital registration and surveys using the preceding
birth technique [PBT] [Hill & Aguirre, 1990]. The method to synthesize mortality data has recently been refined such
that standard errors can be estimated and the statistical significance of mortality trends can be determined.
Platform: DHS (USAID/MACRO), MICS (UNICEF), or other nationally representative surveys
Frequency: Every 5 years
REFERENCES
●
Hill AG, Aguirre A. Childhood mortality estimates using the preceding birth technique: some applications and extensions.
Population Studies 1990;44:317–40.
●
Hill K, Pande R, Mahy M, Jones G. Trends in child mortality in the developing world: 1960–1996. New York: UNICEF,
1999.
●
ORC Macro, MEASURE DHS+. Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS). ORC Macro, Calverton, MD, USA.
http://www.measuredhs.com.
●
Rowe AK, Rowe SY, Snow RW, et al. For the Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group. Estimates of the burden of
mortality directly attributable to malaria for children under 5 years of age in Africa for the year 2000. Final report. 2005.
●
The state of the world’s children 2005: childhood under threat. New York, NY, United Nations Children’s Fund, 2004
(http://www.unicef.org/sowc05/english/sowc05.pdf, accessed 25 February 2005).
●
Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS-2)/End decade assessment. New York, NY, United Nations Children’s Fund, 2001
(http://www.childinfo.org/MICS2/natlMICSrepz/ MICSnatrep.htm/).
●
Roll Back Malaria Monitoring & Evaluation Reference Group (MERG), Survey and Indicator Guidance Task Force.
http://rbm.who.int/merg and http://www.rollbackmalaria.org/partnership/wg/wg_monitoring/docs/HHsurvey_schedule.
xls.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/monitoringevaluation-130506024712-phpapp01/85/Monitoring-and-Evaluation-Toolkit-71-320.jpg)
Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit
- 1. MONITORING AND EVALUATION TOOLKIT HIV/AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS AND MALARIA Annexes: Selected Indicators for HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Second Edition January 2006
- 3. Annexes: selected Indicators for HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Table of Contents ANNEX A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators................................................................... 5 ANNEX B: Description of TB/HIV Indicators ...................................................................... 31 ANNEX C: Description of TB Indicators ............................................................................... 43 ANNEX D: Description of Malaria Indicators ...................................................................... 51 Note: The indicators presented in this annex are a selection from a larger, more comprehensive list of indicators available for each disease area. Readers are encouraged to refer to the full list of indicator resources listed under the heading of “Guidelines” in each disease section (HIV/AIDS, TB/HIV, TB, Malaria and Health Systems Strenghtening) of the M&E Toolkit itself to find a comprehen- sive overview of ALL core and additional indicators available for their use.
- 5. ANNEX A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators
- 7. 7 PREVENTION INDICATOR (HIV-PI 1): BEHAVIOUR CHANGE COMMUNICATION Provision of life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education in schools Percentage of schools with at least one teacher who has been trained in participatory life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education and who taught it during the last academic year. RATIONALE This indicator is a measure of the progress in implementing life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education in schools. It is a measure of coverage by schools – that is, estimating the proportion of schools that report having such programs. It is not a measure of the quality of such programs. For this indicator to be most meaningful, it should be combined with measures of quality. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of schools with at least one teacher trained in, and regularly teaching, life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education Denominator: Number of schools Note: The target population for this indicator is primary and secondary schools. Principals/heads of a nationally representative sample of schools (to include both private and public schools, and primary and secondary schools) are briefed on the meaning of life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education and are then asked the following questions: 1. Does your school have at least one qualified teacher who has been trained in participatory life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education in the last five years? 2. If the answer to question 1 is “yes”: Did this person teach life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education on a regular basis in your school throughout the last academic year? (“throughout” meaning at least 5–15 hours of life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education programming per year per grade of pupil) A qualified teacher is one that has participated in, and successfully completed, a training course focusing on the skills required to conduct participatory learning experiences that aim to develop knowledge, positive attitudes and skills (e.g., interpersonal communication, negotiation, decision-making and critical-thinking skills and coping strategies) that assist young people in maintaining safe lifestyles. The criteria of teaching on a regular basis is grounded in research findings that show that high-quality programs can produce good outcomes with five to 15 hours of life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education programming per year per grade of pupil. The time dimension of the last academic year will be, in each country, defined according to the educational calendar (usually nine to 10 months within one calendar year, designed to allow students to complete one educational level, or grade). If the sample was selected to represent different strata, the results can be disaggregated by school type (i.e., female and male, large and small, urban and rural, private or public, and primary or secondary). Where a school is both primary and secondary, information should be collected and reported separately for each level. In addition, primary and secondary school attendance rates for the most recent academic year available should be stated. Resources permitting, the following additional four questions can also be included (in the case of the answer to ques- tion 1 above being “yes”): ➪
- 8. 8 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators 3. How many teachers at your school have received training in participatory life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education in the last five years? 4. How many of these teachers taught life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education program in your school during the last academic year? 5. How many classes and students in each grade in your school received life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education last year? 6. How long was the program/course for each grade in hours? With information on the overall school-age population and on the above questions, it is possible to estimate the proportion of all young people, as well as the proportion of school-going young people, who actually receive life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education. For a guide to quality aspects of a life-skills-based HIV/AIDS education, refer to UNICEF website: www.unicef.org/lifeskills/ Platform: School-based survey Frequency: Biennial REFERENCES ● WHO-UNAIDS (2004) Guide to Monitoring and Evaluating National HIV/AIDS Prevention Programs for Young People. Geneva. www.who.int/hiv/pub/epidemiologu/me_prev_yp/en
- 9. 9 PREVENTION INDICATOR (HIV-PI 2): BEHAVIOUR CHANGE COMMUNICATION Most-at-risk populations: prevention programs Percentage of [most-at-risk population(s)] reached with HIV/AIDS prevention programs. RATIONALE Most-at-risk populations are often difficult to reach with HIV/AIDS prevention programs. However, in order to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS among these populations as well as into the general population, it is important that they access these services. This indicator is to assess progress in implementing HIV/AIDS prevention programs for most-at-risk populations and should be calculated separately for each population that is considered most-at-risk in a given country, e.g., sex workers, injecting drug users, men who have sex with men. Note:Countrieswithgeneralizedepidemicsmayalsohaveaconcentratedsub-epidemicamongoneormoremost-at-risk populations. If so, it would be valuable for them to calculate and report on this indicator for those populations. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of [most-at-risk population] respondents who have accessed HIV/AIDS prevention programs during the last 12 months Denominator: Number of most-at-risk population included in the survey sample or prevalence estimation methods for the size of the most-at-risk population for the denominator (if the data is being collected through program monitoring records) Note: Data collected for this indicator should be disaggregated by gender and age (<25/25+). Whenever possible, data for most-at-risk populations should be collected through civil society organizations that have worked closely with this population in the field. Access to survey respondents as well as the data collected from them must remain confidential. MEASUREMENT The data can be collected through special surveys and program monitoring records. Surveys: Respondents are asked a series of questions about the exposure/use of key HIV prevention services. Depending on local contexts, the list would include (1) outreach and peer education; (2) exposure to targeted mass media; (3) STI screening and/or treatment; (4) HIV counseling and testing; (5) substitution therapy and safer injection practices for IDU. Accessing and/or surveying most-at-risk populations can be challenging. Consequently, data obtained may not be based on a representative sample of the national most-at-risk population being surveyed. If there are concerns that the data is not based on a representative sample, these concerns should be reflected in the interpretation of the survey data. Where different sources of data exist, the best available estimate should be used. Information on the sample size, the quality/reliability of the data and any related issues should be included in the report submitted with this indicator. Program monitoring: records of programs providing the above-mentioned services are compiled and aggregated to obtain an overall measure of the reach of prevention programs. When the indicator is based on program data, an attempt to address the issue of double counting during the reference period should be made. There is a need to ensure that clients served (as opposed to clients-visits) for the same service or across services are counted. Different types of services will all count the same in estimating overall service coverage. ➪
- 10. 10 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators Platform: The data can be collected through special surveys and program monitoring records Frequency: Biennial REFERENCES ● UNAIDS (2005) Monitoring the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS: Guidelines on construction of core indicators-2006 reporting, UNGASS, Geneva ● WHO-UNAIDS (2005) A guide to monitoring and evaluating national HIV prevention programs for most-at-risk populations in low-level and concentrated epidemic settings (draft)
- 11. 11 PREVENTION INDICATOR (HIV-PI 3): BEHAVIOR CHANGE COMMUNICATION Knowledge of HIV prevention among young people Percentage of young people who both correctly identify ways of preventing the sexual transmission of HIV and who reject major misconceptions about HIV. RATIONALE This indicator combines the measures of knowledge of HIV transmission and prevention with the prevalence of most common misconceptions about HIV. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of young men and young women who gave correct answers to all five questions relating to transmission of HIV and misconceptions about HIV Denominator: All young men and young women surveyed Note: Analysis and reporting in percentage broken down by males and females according to urban/rural residence. MEASUREMENT This indicator is constructed from responses to the following set of prompted questions: 1. Can the risk of HIV transmission be reduced by having sex with only one faithful, uninfected partner? 2. Can the risk of HIV transmission be reduced by using condoms? 3. Can a healthy-looking person have HIV infection? 4. Can a person get HIV infection from mosquito bites? 5. Can a person get HIV infection by sharing a meal with someone who is infected? Items 4 and 5 may be replaced with the two most common local (national) misconceptions about HIV transmission or prevention. For example, “Can HIV in an infected man be cured if he has sex with a virgin girl?” or “Can people get HIV by getting injections with a needle that was already used by someone else?” Items 1 and 2 measure the correct knowledge for preventing HIV transmission. Item 3 measures a common misconcep- tion that healthy-looking people do not have HIV infection. This is a widespread misconception among young people, and it can result in unprotected sex with an infected partner. Items 4 and 5 refer to two other misconceptions about HIV transmission. Together the indicator provides program managers with a measure of the overall knowledge that young people have about avoiding HIV. Previous knowledge indicators have included abstinence as a “correct” method of prevention used in this indicator. Abstinence is an extremely important prevention option for young people. Research in many settings shows that already sexually active people rarely use abstinence as a primary HIV-prevention method. However, young people in particular may be practicing “secondary abstinence” – that is, a prolonged volun- tary period of sexual inactivity following sexual initiation. Negative responses on this item may therefore result from people believing that abstinence is not feasible, rather than from belief that abstinence does not provide effective protection. In surveys among adolescents, however, questions about abstinence continue to be important. Programs focusing on delaying age at first sex among adolescents (ages 10–19) may choose to add a knowledge indicator that includes correct responses to a question about abstinence as a prevention method in the numerator. A suggested ques- tion on abstinence might be: “Can the risk of HIV transmission be reduced by abstaining from sexual intercourse?” ➪
- 12. 12 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators This indicator should be presented as a percentage separately for men and women, disaggregated by age in the following groups: 10–14 (if available) 15–19, 20–24, 15-24, and 10–24 (again, if available). This indicator should be reported for the 15-24 age group for the Millennium Development Goal and the UNGASS HIV Goal indicators. The indicator can also be disaggregated by question to show gaps in knowledge and prevalence of misconceptions. Platform: Nationally representative general population survey Frequency: Every 2-4 years REFERENCES ● WHO-UNAIDS (2004) Guide to Monitoring and Evaluating National HIV/AIDS Prevention Programs for Young People. Geneva. www.who.int/hiv/pub/epidemiologu/me_prev_yp/en ● UNAIDS (2005) Monitoring the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS: Guidelines on construction of core indicators- 2006 reporting, UNGASS, Geneva
- 13. 13 PREVENTION INDICATOR (HIV-PI 4): CONDOM DISTRIBUTION Retail outlets and service delivery points with condoms in stock The proportion of randomly-selected retail outlets and service delivery points that have condoms in stock at the time of a survey, of all retail outlets and service delivery points selected for survey. RATIONALE This indicator reflects the success of attempts to broaden the distribution of condoms so that they are more widely available to people at locations and times when people are likely to need them. It measures actual distribution of condoms at designated points at any one point in time. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of retail outlets and service delivery points that have condoms in stock at the time of a survey Denominator: Total number of retail outlets and service delivery points that have been selected for the survey Note: Sites in both urban and rural areas should be selected. MEASUREMENT A number of sites of different types (i.e. pharmacies, clinics, bars and clubs) are randomly selected for a retail survey from a standard checklist of venues where condoms should be accessible, including bars and nightclubs, different classes of retail shops, STI clinics and other service provision points. While the indicator gives a single summary figure, the data can also be disaggregated by outlet type. Platform: Retail surveys (PSI protocol to evaluate social marketing programs, WHO/GPA prevention indicator 3) Frequency: Quarterly/annually REFERENCES ● UNAIDS/MEASURE (2000) National AIDS Programs: A guide to monitoring and evaluation. Geneva: UNAIDS. www.cpc.unc.edu/measure/guide/guide.html
- 14. 14 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators ➪ PREVENTION INDICATOR (HIV-PI 5): TESTING AND COUNSELING People receiving counseling and testing The percentage of the general population receiving an HIV test, the results, and post-test counseling. RATIONALE HIV testing and counseling are important entry points for prevention and care needs. It is therefore important to measure the number of people who access these services, as an indicator of the number of people who could poten- tially benefit from prevention and care. This indicator is designed to show how many people have been tested and received post-test counseling services. For the program manager, this indicator would be a cascade that would be able to identify the following: 1. Number of individuals who received pre-test counseling and/or pre-test information sufficient to ensure informed consent 2. Percent of those tested who received pre-test counseling and actually tested 3. Percent of those tested who received their results 4. Percent of those tested who received post-test counseling DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: The number of people who have received HIV test results and post-test counseling Denominator: Number of people surveyed or total population, depending on method of data collection Note: Analysis and reporting by component and gender is recommended. It is suggested that data also be collected on those requesting an HIV test, receiving the test and receiving their results. It is also recommended that data be disag- gregated for those under 25 as follows: 15-19 and 20-24. MEASUREMENT The following methodologies are recommended: 1. Household survey: By asking respondents whether they have ever been tested and if so whether they have received the results. This indicator can be captured in a nationally-representative manner. 2. Health Management Information Systems (HMIS): Ideally, information for this indicator can be collected by reviewing data collected at the local level(s) and available through the HMIS at the national level. 3. Health Facility Survey. Where HMIS are not fully operational, the use of health facility surveys with a testing and counseling component in all relevant units/departments may be necessary. It is necessary to stratify the indicator by how these services are delivered. Specifically, whether by integrated (i.e. testing for diagnostic purposes) or vertical (i.e. stand alone VCT) service delivery. The denominator, total population, can be obtained from the latest census data. Platform: UNAIDS general population survey; DHS AIDS module; FHI adult BSS; youth BSS Frequency: Annually
- 15. 15 REFERENCES ● UNAIDS/MEASURE (2000) National AIDS Programs: A guide to monitoring and evaluation. Geneva: UNAIDS. www.cpc.unc.edu/measure/guide/guide.html ● UNAIDS-WHO (2004) National AIDS Programs. A guide to monitoring and evaluating HIV/AIDS care and support. Geneva: UNAIDS
- 16. 16 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators PREVENTION INDICATOR (HIV-PI 6): PREVENTION OF MOTHER TO CHILD TRANSMISSION Health facilities offering minimum package of PMTCT The percentage of public, missionary, and workplace venues (family planning and primary health care clinics, ANC/MCH, and maternity hospitals) offering the minimum package of services to prevent HIV infection in infants and young children in the past 12 months. RATIONALE This indicator provides critical information on the national availability of prevention and care efforts for women and infants. It is useful to program planners in determining where services may be needed, or where facilities are providing the full spectrum of services to prevent HIV infection in women and infants. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of public, missionary, and workplace venues (family planning and primary health care clinics, ANC/MCH, and maternity hospitals) offering the minimum package of services to prevent HIV infec- tion in infants and young children in the past 12 months Denominator: All public, missionary, and workplace venues (family planning and primary health care clinics, ANC/MCH, and maternity hospitals) Note: Analysis and reporting by type of service is recommended. MEASUREMENT The information required for this indicator can be collected through a variety of different methods, and depends on resource availability as well as the amount of detail sought. It focuses on the minimum package of services which is defined by the type of clinical setting (see reference below). One option is to send a questionnaire to all public, missionary and workplace health facilities offering family planning and primary health care clinics, ANC/MCH, and maternity services. Another way to collect the relevant information is by adapting other instruments that already exist. Platform: Health facility surveys Frequency: Every 2-3 years REFERENCES ● UNAIDS-WHO (2004) National guide to monitoring and evaluating programs for the prevention of HIV in infants and young children. Geneva
- 17. 17 PREVENTION INDICATOR (HIV-PI 7): PREVENTION OF MOTHER TO CHILD TRANSMISSION HIV-infected pregnant women receiving a complete course of antiretroviral prophylaxis to reduce the risk of mother to child transmission (MTCT) Percentage of HIV-positive pregnant women receiving a complete course of ARV prophylaxis to reduce MTCT in accordance with nationally approved treatment protocol (or WHO/UNAIDS standards) in last 12 months. RATIONALE This indicator assesses the progress in preventing mother-to-child HIV transmission through the provision of ARV prophylaxis. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of HIV-positive pregnant women receiving a complete course of ARV prophylaxis to reduce the likelihood of MTCT in accordance with nationally approved treatment protocol (or WHO/ UNAIDS standards) in last 12 months Denominator: Estimated number of HIV-infected pregnant women giving birth in last 12 months Note: Breakdown by type of service is recommended and if possible by women by age group: 15-19, 20-24, 25-34, 35-49. MEASUREMENT The number of HIV-infected pregnant women provided with antiretroviral prophylaxis to reduce the risk of MTCT in the last 12 months is obtained from program monitoring records. Only those women who completed the full course should be included. The number of HIV-infected pregnant women to whom antiretroviral prophylaxis to reduce the risk of MTCT could potentially have been given is estimated by multiplying the total number of women who gave birth in the last 12 months (Central Statistics Office estimates of births) by the most recent national estimate of HIV prevalence in pregnant women (HIV sentinel surveillance antenatal clinic estimates). Platform: Program monitoring records / Central Statistics Office estimates of births Frequency: Every 2-3 years REFERENCES ● UNAIDS-WHO (2004) National guide to monitoring and evaluating programs for the prevention of HIV in infants and young children, Geneva ● UNAIDS (2005) Monitoring the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS: Guidelines on construction of core indicators-2006 reporting, UNGASS, Geneva
- 18. 18 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators PREVENTION INDICATOR (HIV-PI 8): SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED INFECTION (STI) DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT STI comprehensive case management Percentage of patients with STIs at health care facilities who are appropriately diagnosed, treated and counseled. RATIONALE The availability and utilization of services to treat and contain the spread of STIs can reduce the rate of HIV trans- mission within a population. One of the cornerstones of STI control is comprehensive case management of patients with symptomatic STIs. This composite indicator reflects the competence of health service providers to appropriately provide these services, and the quality of services provided. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of STI patients for whom the correct procedures were followed on: (1) history taking; (2) examination; (3) diagnosis and treatment; and (4) effective counseling on partner notification, condom use and HIV testing Denominator: Number of STI patients for whom provider-client interactions were observed Note: Disaggregation by gender and for patients under and over 25 years of age is recommended. Ideally, ages under 25 would be disaggregated as follows: 15-19 and 20-24. Scores for each component of the indicator (i.e., history taking, examination, diagnosis and treatment, and coun- seling) must be reported as well as the overall indicator score. MEASUREMENT Data are collected in observations of provider-client interaction at a sample of health care facilities offering STI serv- ices. Providers are assessed on history taking, examination, proper diagnosis and treatment of patients, and effective counseling, including counseling on partner notification, condom use and HIV testing. “Appropriate” diagnosis and treatment and counseling procedures in any given country are those specified in national STI service guidelines. Platform: Health facility survey – based on WHO/UNAIDS revised guidelines on evaluating STI services and/or MEASURE service provision assessment (SPA) Frequency: Biennial REFERENCES ● UNAIDS (2005) Monitoring the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS: Guidelines on construction of core indicators-2006 reporting, UNGASS, Geneva
- 19. 19 PREVENTION INDICATOR (HIV-PI 9): BLOOD SAFETY AND UNIVERSAL PRECAUTIONS Districts with access to donor recruitment and blood transfusion Percent of districts or regions with access to blood transfusion services which do not pay blood donors, and do not recruit donors from among relatives of the patient. RATIONALE Many countries working to improve access to safe blood have established blood transfusion services including blood banks at the regional or district level, and are working systematically to enhance the recruitment of voluntary donors as well as reducing or eliminating reliance on blood donations from relatives and paid donors. This indicator assesses to what extent this has been implemented at the level dictated by national policy. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of districts or regions with access to blood transfusion services which do not pay blood donors, and do not recruit donors from among relatives of the patient Denominator: Total number of districts or regions MEASUREMENT A district or region is considered to score positively on this indicator if at least 95 percent of blood transfused is supplied by a regional or provincial blood transfusion service that screens donors for risk behaviors and excludes dona- tions from relatives and paid donors. Platform: MEASURE Evaluation Draft Blood Safety Protocol Frequency: Quarterly REFERENCES ● UNAIDS/MEASURE (2000) National AIDS Programs: A guide to monitoring and evaluation. Geneva: UNAIDS. www.cpc.unc.edu/measure/guide/guide.html
- 20. 20 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators PREVENTION INDICATOR (HIV-PI 10): BLOOD SAFETY AND UNIVERSAL PRECAUTIONS Transfused blood units screened for HIV The percentage of blood units transfused in the last 12 months that have been adequately screened for HIV according to national or WHO guidelines. RATIONALE Blood safety programs aim to ensure that the overwhelming majority (ideally 100 percent) of blood units are screened for HIV, and those that are included in the national blood supply are indeed uninfected. This indicator gives an idea of the overall percentage of blood units that have been screened to sufficiently high standards that can be confidently declared as HIV free. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of blood units screened for HIV in the previous 12 months, and among those, the number screened up to WHO or national standards Denominator: Total number of blood units transfused in the previous 12 months Note: Breakdown by components of the indicator is recommended. MEASUREMENT The number of units transfused and the number screened for HIV should be available from health information systems. Quality of screening may be determined from a special study that re-tests a sample of blood previously screened, or from an assessment of the conditions under which screening occurred. In situations where this approach is not feasible, data on the percentage of facilities with good screening and transfusion records and no stockouts of test kits may be used to estimate adequately screened blood for this indicator. Platform: MEASURE Evaluation Draft Blood Safety Protocol Frequency: Every 2-3 years REFERENCES ● UNAIDS/MEASURE (2000) National AIDS Programs: A guide to monitoring and evaluation. Geneva: UNAIDS. www.cpc.unc.edu/measure/guide/guide.html ● UNAIDS (2005) Monitoring the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS: Guidelines on construction of core indicators-2006 reporting, UNGASS, Geneva
- 21. 21 TREATMENT INDICATOR (HIV-TI 1): ANTIRETROVIRAL TREATMENT AND MONITORING People with advanced HIV infection receiving antiretroviral combination therapy Percentage of people with advanced HIV infection receiving antiretroviral combination therapy. RATIONALE As the HIV pandemic matures, increasing numbers of people are reaching advanced stages of HIV infection. Antiretroviral combination therapy has been shown to reduce mortality amongst those infected and efforts are being made to make it more affordable even within less-developed countries. Antiretroviral combination therapy should be provided in conjunction with broader care and support services including counseling for family caregiver. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of people with advanced HIV infection who receive antiretroviral combination treatment according to the nationally approved treatment protocol (or WHO/UNAIDS standards) Denominator: Number of people with advanced HIV infection Note: This indicator should be disaggregated by public/private services and by age group and gender. Age groups should be 0-2, 3-4, 5-9, 10-14, 15-34, 35-49, 50+. MEASUREMENT The numerator of this indicator consists of the number of people receiving treatment at start of year plus the number of people who commenced treatment in the last 12 months minus the number of people for whom treatment was terminated in the last 12 months (including those who died). The number of people with advanced HIV infection is assumed to be 15 percent of the total number of people currently infected (for the purposes of this indicator). The latter is estimated using the most recent national sentinel surveillance data. The start and end dates of the period for which the number of people are given antiretroviral therapy should be stated. Overlaps between reporting periods should be avoided wherever possible. Platform: Program monitoring records Frequency: Biennial REFERENCES ● UNAIDS-WHO (2004) National AIDS Programs: A guide to indicators for monitoring and evaluating national antiretroviral programs, Geneva ● UNAIDS (2005) Monitoring the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS: Guidelines on construction of core indicators-2006 reporting, UNGASS, Geneva
- 22. 22 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators TREATMENT INDICATOR (HIV-TI 2): ANTIRETROVIRAL TREATMENT AND MONITORING Health facilities capable of providing advanced HIV clinical care and psychosocial support services for HIV-infected persons Percentage of health facilities that have the capacity and conditions to provide advanced HIV/AIDS clinical care and psychosocial support services, including providing and monitoring antiretroviral combination therapy. RATIONALE This indicator measures the availability of advanced services specific to people living with HIV/AIDS. It is assumed that the services and items measured in this indicator require substantial input and personnel training beyond what is routine for most health systems. The ability to provide advanced HIV/AIDS care is defined as: (a) systems and items to support the management of opportunistic infections and the provision of palliative care (symptomatic treatment) for the advanced care of people living with HIV/AIDS; (b) systems and items to support advanced services for the care of people living with HIV/AIDS; (c) systems and items to support antiretroviral combination therapy; (d) conditions to provide advanced inpatient care for people living with HIV/AIDS; (e) conditions to support home care services; and (f) post exposure prophylaxis. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: 1.Number of facilities at which the individual items for each service or item listed above exist 2.Number of facilities at which all components for each individual service or item (a, b, c, d, e or f) exist 3.Number of facilities at which all components for all individual services and items (a, b, c, d, e and f) exist Denominator: For 1: the total number of health facilities surveyed For 2 and 3: the total number of health facilities at which HIV/AIDS services in each of the areas identified in the defini- tion are offered or relevant MEASUREMENT This information should be collected through a health facility survey with observation in all relevant service areas. Like core indicator 6, interviews of HIV/AIDS service providers would also be needed. The specific items for each service should be presented individually and at a first level of aggregation (all components of each service or item). When a reasonable proportion of facilities begin to have all first-level aggregated components, a second-level aggregation can be presented when appropriate. Platform: Health facility surveys Frequency: Every 2-4 years REFERENCES ● UNAIDS (2004) National AIDS Programs. A guide to monitoring and evaluating HIV/AIDS care and support. Geneva: UNAIDS
- 23. 23 CARE AND SUPPORT (HIV-CS 1): SUPPORT FOR ORPHANS Orphans and other children made vulnerable by HIV/AIDS whose households received free basic external support Percentage of orphans and vulnerable children whose households received free basic external support in caring for the child. RATIONALE This indicator measures support coming from a source other than friends, family or neighbors (unless they are working for a community-based group or organization) given free of user charges to households with orphans and vulnerable children. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of orphans and vulnerable children residing in households that received at least one of the following services for the child: ● medical care support within the past 12 months; ● emotional support within the past 3 months; ● school-related assistance within the past 12 months; and ● other social support, including material support, within the past 3 months. Denominator: Total number of orphans and vulnerable children Note: If sample sizes permit, data should be analyzed and reported by age (0–5, 6–9, and 10–17 years) and by sex. MEASUREMENT As part of a household survey, household rosters can be used to identify all eligible orphans and vulnerable children (under 18 years of age). For each household with orphans and vulnerable children, a series of questions is asked about the types and frequency of support received and the primary source of the help. This survey tool may also be used in low-prevalence settings or targeted populations with similar but adapted methods. Platform: Household surveys Frequency: Every 2-4 years REFERENCES ● UNAIDS/UNICEF (2005). Guide to monitoring and evaluation of the national response for children orphaned and made vulnerable by HIV/AIDS. New York: UNICEF. www.unaids.org/EN/in+focus/monitoringevaluation/m_e+library.asp ● UNAIDS-WHO (2004) National AIDS Programs. A guide to monitoring and evaluating HIV/AIDS care and support. Geneva: UNAIDS www.unaids.org/EN/in+focus/monitoringevaluation/m_e+library.asp ● UNAIDS (2005) Monitoring the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS: Guidelines on construction of core indicators- 2006 reporting, UNGASS, Geneva
- 24. 24 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators SUPPORTIVE ENVIRONMENT (HIV-SE 1): WORKPLACE POLICY Companies with HIV/AIDS workplace policies and programs Percentage of large enterprises/companies which have HIV/AIDS workplace policies and programs. RATIONALE The workplace is often a highly convenient and conducive setting for HIV control activities and workplace-based inter- ventions have been proven to be effective. The indicator is useful even in countries where HIV prevalence is low because early action in educating workers on HIV prevention is essential if the serious economic and social consequences of HIV/AIDS are to be avoided. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of employers with HIV/AIDS policies and regulations that meet all criteria Denominator: Number of employers surveyed Note: Analysis and reporting both individually by private/public sectors and by both combined is recommended MEASUREMENT Private sector employers are selected on the basis of the size of the labor force. Public sector employers should be the ministries of transport, labor, tourism, education and health. Employers are asked to state whether they are currently implementing personnel policies and procedures that cover a minimum of specified aspects (see reference for details). Copies of written personnel policies and regulations should be obtained and assessed wherever possible. Platform: Survey of the 30 largest employers – 25 private sector; 5 public sector Frequency: Biennial REFERENCES ● UNAIDS (2005) Monitoring the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS: Guidelines on construction of core indicators- 2006 reporting, UNGASS, Geneva
- 25. 25 HIV OUTCOME INDICATOR (HIV-OI 1): MULTIPLE PARTNERS Women and men aged 15-49 who had sex with more than one partner in the last twelve months Percentage of women and men aged 15-49 who had sex with more than one partner in the last twelve months, of all people surveyed aged 15-49 who report being sexually active in the last twelve months. RATIONALE Prevention messages should focus on abstinence and mutual monogamy. As sexual relationships among young people are frequently unstable, relationships that were intended to be mutually monogamous may break up and be replaced by other relationships in which similar intentions prevail. Particularly in high HIV prevalence epidemics, serial monogamy is not greatly protective against HIV infection. This indicator measures the proportion of people that have been exposed to more than one partner in the last twelve months. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of women and men aged 15-49 who have had sexual intercourse with more than one partner in the last twelve months Denominator: Number of women and men aged 15-49 who report being sexually active in the last twelve months MEASUREMENT In a survey among people aged 15-49, respondents are asked about their sexual partnerships in the last twelve months. The indicator should be reported separately for men and women. It should also be constructed separately for those aged 15-19 and 20-24, 15-24 and 15-49 if sample size allows. To cope with the measurement challenge of men in polygamous societies who may have multiple partners within marriage, it is necessary to disaggregate this indicator by marital status including polygamy. Furthermore, given that the likelihood of HIV transmission during recent (acute) infection may be an order of magnitude greater than during chronic infection, it may be desirable to conduct analyses to asses the percentage of sexually active individuals who had two or more partners during the previous two months. Quantifying the prevalence of overlapping or concurrent partnerships may provide a useful proxy for quantifying possible exposures to HIV during the period of acute infec- tion. Platform: Population based surveys such as UNAIDS general population survey, DHS/AIS, BSS (youth), RHS Frequency: Baseline, then every 2-3 years REFERENCES ● WHO-UNAIDS (2004) Guide to Monitoring and Evaluating National HIV/AIDS Prevention Programs for Young People. Geneva. www.who.int/hiv/pub/epidemiologu/me_prev_yp/en
- 26. 26 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators HIV OUTCOME INDICATOR (HIV-OI 2): ABSTINENCE Primary abstinence Percentage of young women and men aged 15-19 who never had sex. RATIONALE This indicator provides information on important aspects of sexual behavior. It describes the proportion of young people surveyed who never had sex, thus the prevalence of virginity among young people. Looking at this prevalence within narrow age ranges (15-16, 17-19, for example, or ideally, by single ages) across time allows program managers to see if the age at first sex is changing. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of young women and men aged 15-19 who never had sex Denominator: Number of young women and men aged 15-19 surveyed MEASUREMENT Respondents (15-19 year olds) are asked if they have ever had sex. The indicator should be reported separately for men and women. If the indicator is calculated for groups of ages larger than the period of change in abstinence, the indicator will not reflect changes e.g. change in abstinence among 15-19 year old, will not reflect change over a 2-3 year period. It is therefore recommended that this indicator be reported by single age. Platform: Population based surveys such as DHS/AIS, RHS Frequency: Baseline, then every 2-3 years REFERENCES ● Adapted from UNAIDS (2004)
- 27. 27 HIV OUTCOME INDICATOR (HIV-OI 3): ABSTINENCE Secondary abstinence Percentage of young women and men aged 15-24 who never had sex in the last year of those who ever had sex. RATIONALE This indicator is a measure of sex among young people. A high score on this indicator reflects a failure of prevention messages stressing abstinence. Given that young people should be the focus of education and prevention programs, deciding to abstain from sex after having precocious sexual activity would be a desired program outcome. This indi- cator measures changes in what may be culturally and socially ascribed norms for early sexual activity. Where programs are advocating a delay of first sex or abstinence, the indicator should show a decrease. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of women and men aged 15-24 who never had sex in the last 12 months Denominator: Number of women and men aged 15-24 who ever had sex MEASUREMENT In a survey among people aged 15-24, respondents are asked about their sexual partnerships in the last twelve months and before. The indicator should be reported separately for men and women. Platform: Population based surveys such as UNAIDS general population survey, DHS/AIS, BSS (youth), RHS Frequency: Baseline, then every 2-3 years REFERENCES ● Adapted from UNAIDS (2000)
- 28. 28 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators HIV OUTCOME INDICATOR (HIV-OI 4): CONSISTENT CONDOM USE Young people’s condom use with non-regular partners Percentage of young people aged 15-24 reporting the consistent use of a condom with non-regular sexual partners in the last year. RATIONALE This indicator shows the extent to which condoms are used by young people who engage in sexual relationships with non-regular partners. When interpreting trends in this indicator, it should be noted that changes might reflect variations in the numbers of persons having sex with non-regular partners and not necessarily variation in condom use. Thus, this indicator should be analyzed carefully considering the changes in proportion of young people having sex with a non-regular partner to understand the programmatic implications. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: The number of young men and young women aged 15-24 years who had sex with non-regular part- ners in the last 12 months and consistently used a condom Denominator: Young men and young women aged 15-24 years who had sex with non-regular partners in the last 12 months Note: The target population for this indicator is 15- to 24-year-olds. Data should always be reported separately for males and females. When sample sizes permit, it is also useful to report for age groups 15-19 and 20-24. MEASUREMENT Respondents are first asked if they have ever had sex. Among those who have, questions are asked about the consistent use of condom with all the partners in the last year and information on the type of partner (such as spouse, live-in partner, boyfriend/girlfriend, acquaintance, commercial sex worker). This indicator should be presented as a percentage, separately for males and females, in three age groups: 15–19, 20-24 and 15–24. Platform: Nationally representative general population survey Frequency: Preferably biennial; at a minimum every 4-5 years REFERENCES ● Adapted from UNAIDS (2000)
- 29. 29 PREVENTION INDICATOR (HIV-OI 5): BEHAVIOR CHANGE COMMUNICATION Intravenous drug users: safe injecting and sexual practices Percentage of IDUs who have adopted behaviors that reduce transmission of HIV, i.e. who both avoid sharing non-sterile injecting equipment and use condoms. RATIONALE Safe injecting and sexual practices among injecting drug users (IDUs) are essential, even in countries where other modes of HIV transmission predominate, because: (1) the risk of HIV transmission among IDUs using contaminated injecting equipment is extremely high; and (2) IDUs can provide a reservoir of infection from which HIV spreads (e.g., through sexual transmission) to the wider population. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of respondents who report having never shared injecting equipment during the last month and who also reported that a condom was used the last time they had sex Denominator: Number of respondents who report injecting drugs in the last month and having had sexual inter- course in the last month Note: Analysis and reporting disaggregated by age (those less than 25 and those over 25) is recommended. MEASUREMENT Survey respondents are asked the following sequence of questions: 1. Have you injected drugs at any time in the last month? 2. If the answer to question 1 is “yes”: Have you shared injecting equipment at any time in the last month? 3. Have you had sexual intercourse in the last month? 4. If the answers to questions 1 and 3 are both “yes”: Did you (or your partner) use a condom when you last had sex? Platform: Time-location cluster sample survey or targeted snowball sample survey (see behavioral surveillance survey (BSS) manual) Frequency: Biennial REFERENCES ● FHI (2000) Behavioral Surveillance Surveys (BSS): guidelines for the repeated behavioral surveys in Populations at risk of HIV ● UNAIDS (2005) Monitoring the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS: Guidelines on construction of core indicators- 2006 reporting, UNGASS, Geneva
- 30. 30 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex A: Description of HIV/AIDS Indicators CARE AND SUPPORT (HIV-OI 6): SUPPORT FOR ORPHANS Orphans’ school attendance Ratio of orphaned children compared to non-orphaned children aged 10-14 who are currently attending school. RATIONALE HIV/AIDS is claiming lives of ever-growing numbers of adults just as they are forming families and bringing up children. As a result, orphan prevalence is rising steadily in many countries. Fewer relatives within the prime adult ages means that orphaned children face an increasingly uncertain future. Orphanhood is frequently accompanied by prejudice and increased poverty – factors that can further jeopardize children’s chances of completing school education, which may lead to the adoption of survival strategies that increase vulnerability to HIV. It is important, therefore, to monitor the extent to which AIDS-support programs succeed in securing the educational opportunities of orphaned children. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Orphans’ school attendance (1): Numerator: Number of children (10-14 years old) who have lost both parents and are still in school Denominator: Number of children (10-14 years old) who have lost both parents Non-orphans’ school attendance (2): Numerator: Number of children (10-14 years old) both of whose parents are still alive, who live with at least one parent and who are still in school Denominator: Number of children (10-14 years old) whose parents are both still alive and who live with at least one parent Calculate the ration of (1) to (2) Note: Indicator scores are required for all children aged 10-14 years and for boys and girls separately. Where possible, the indicator should also be calculated by single year of age. The minimum number of orphaned 10-14 year old chil- dren needed to calculate this indicator is 50. MEASUREMENT In a population-based survey respondents are asked whether they are currently attending school. The indicator is the ratio of the current school attendance rate of children aged 10–14 both of whose biological parents have died to the current school attendance rate of children aged 10–14 whose parents are both still alive and who currently live with at least one biological parent. Countries are also strongly encouraged to report the ratio of OVC attending school versus non-OVC attending school. In countries where the number of children who are orphans is relatively low (less than 5–8 percent of the population under age 18), this indicator will overcome the problem of low numbers of double orphans. Platform: Population-based surveys such as DHS, UNICEF MICS, or other representative survey Frequency: Every 2-4 years REFERENCES ● UNAIDS/UNICEF (2005). Guide to monitoring and evaluation of the national response for children orphaned and made vulnerable by HIV/AIDS. New York: UNICEF. www.unaids.org/EN/in+focus/monitoringevaluation/m_e+library.asp ● UNAIDS (2005) Monitoring the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS: Guidelines on construction of core indicators- 2006 reporting, UNGASS, Geneva
- 31. ANNEX B: Description of TB/HIV Indicators
- 32. 32 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex B: Description of TB/HIV Indicators TB/HIV INDICATOR (TB/HIV 1): INTENSIFIED TB CASE FINDING AMONG PLWHA Number of PLWHA, receiving HIV testing and counseling or HIV treatment and care services, who were screened for TB symptoms expressed as a proportion of all PLWHA attending HIV testing and counseling or HIV treatment and care services. RATIONALE This is a process indicator for an activity intended to reduce the impact of TB among PLWHA. It will demonstrate the level of implementation of the recommendation that PLWHA are screened for TB at diagnosis and at all follow-up visits. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of PLWHA seen at HIV testing and counseling or HIV treatment and care services who were screened for TB symptoms, over a given time period Denominator: Total number of PLWHA seen at HIV testing and counseling or HIV treatment and care services, over the same given time period Note: This can be reported as a total or separately by facility type for each situation where HIV care and support is provided or HIV counseling and testing is conducted, e.g. number of HIV-positive clients newly diagnosed at VCT center or number of HIV-positive clients who attend annual check-up who are screened for TB symptoms. MEASUREMENT Data should be collected routinely at all HIV testing and counseling facilities (e.g. VCT centers, PMTCT providers, medical inpatient wards, private sector) and any situation where regular HIV care and support are provided (e.g., ART clinics, HIV care clinics, PWLHA support groups). A suggested method of conducting the screening would be to ask HIV-positive clients whether they are currently on TB treatment. If not, they are then asked about the key symptoms of TB disease (e.g. cough, fever, night sweats, recent weight loss, lymphadenopathy). A simple checklist could be used and any positive response would indicate that the individual may be a TB suspect. TB control program protocols should define the criteria for identifying a TB suspect. If on questioning they are defined as a TB suspect (as per national protocols) treatment of latent TB infection should not be given and they should be investigated for TB (or referred to TB service for investigation) and treated appropri- ately. Platform: Modified HIV testing and counseling register or HIV treatment and care register Frequency: Data would be collected continuously and reported and analyzed quarterly REFERENCES ● World Health Organization (2004). Guide to monitoring and evaluation for collaborative TB/HIV activities (WHO/HTM/ TB/2004.342) ● Interim Policy on Collaborative TB/HIV Activities. WHO/HTM/HIV/2004.1 and WHO/HTM/TB/2004.330
- 33. 33 TB/HIV INDICATOR (TB/HIV 2): INTENSIFIED TB CASE FINDING AMONG PLWHA Number of cases of newly-diagnosed TB identified in PLWHA attending for HIV testing and counseling or HIV treatment and care services (who were screened for TB symptoms), expressed as a proportion of all PLWHA attending HIV testing and counseling services and HIV treatment and care services (who were screened for TB symptoms). RATIONALE This indicator is important for demonstrating the contribution that collaborative TB/HIV activities can make in increasing TB case-detection rates and thereby reducing the burden of TB in PLWHA and their community. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: The number of cases of newly-diagnosed TB identified in PLWHA attending HIV testing and coun- seling or HIV treatment and care services who were screened for TB symptoms, over a given time period Denominator: Total number of PLWHA attending HIV testing and counseling or HIV treatment and care services who were screened for TB symptoms over the same given time period (This is the same as the numer- ator in indicator TB/HIV 1) This can be reported as a total or separately by facility type for each situation where HIV care and support is provided or HIV counseling and testing is conducted e.g. number of HIV positive clients newly diagnosed at VCT centre or number of HIV positive clients who attend annual check-up and who are screened for TB symptoms. MEASUREMENT The indicator can be further broken down and reported by type of TB, e.g. pulmonary, smear-positive, smear-negative and extra-pulmonary (if these data are routinely collected) and by type of facility (VCT centre, antenatal care clinic, HIV care clinic). The data needed for this indicator are more difficult to collect if TB diagnosis is not carried out on the same site as HIV testing or treatment and care. This will require the establishment of reliable two-way communication between the TB service and the HIV counseling and testing and treatment and care services. Values for this indicator will vary from site to site depending on the level of TB in the community and the quality (or community-perceived quality) of routine TB services. Therefore, it is not readily comparable between countries – and may even vary significantly at a sub-national level – but it will help to demonstrate the added value of collaborative activities to TB case detection. Platform: Modified HIV treatment and care register, counseling and testing register, TB register or TB/HIV register Frequency: Data would be collected continuously and reported and analyzed quarterly REFERENCES ● World Health Organization (2004). Guide to monitoring and evaluation for collaborative TB/HIV activities (WHO/HTM/ TB/2004.342) ● Interim Policy on Collaborative TB/HIV Activities. WHO/HTM/HIV/2004.1 and WHO/HTM/TB/2004.330
- 34. 34 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex B: Description of TB/HIV Indicators TB/HIV INDICATOR (TB/HIV 3): PREVENTION OF TB DISEASE AMONG PLWHA Number of newly-diagnosed HIV-positive clients who are given treatment for latent TB infection (TB preventive therapy) expressed as a proportion of the total number of newly-diagnosed HIV-positive people. RATIONALE This indicator is used to ensure that eligible HIV-positive individuals are given treatment for latent TB infection and thus reduce the incidence of TB in PLWHA. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Total number of newly-diagnosed HIV-positive clients in whom active TB has been excluded who start (given at least one dose) treatment of latent TB infection Denominator: Total number of newly-diagnosed HIV-positive clients MEASUREMENT The data needed for this indicator can be collected in all situations where counseling and testing for HIV is conducted, e.g. VCT centers, PMTCT sites, inpatient medical services or at HIV care services, depending on where TB preventive therapy (TBPT) is to be administered. In all these situations, HIV-positive clients should be screened for TB. Those clients found NOT to have evidence of active TB will be offered intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) according to nationally determined guidelines. All those accepting IPT and receiving at least the first dose of treatment should be recorded. This information could be recorded in an extra column in the HIV care register. To accurately predict drug requirements for supply management, more detailed information will need to be collected. For this purpose, a TBPT register is required where client attendance to collect further drug supplies (usually monthly) is recorded. These facilities will be able to report the number of new cases, continuing cases and completed cases on a quarterly basis. If such information is collected routinely then the indicator of choice would be the “number of HIV-positive clients completing treatment of latent TB infection, as a proportion of the total number of HIV positive clients started on treatment of latent TB infection”. From pilot testing sites it is apparent that between 10 and 50 percent of clients who test HIV-positive can be expected to start TBPT, some of whom will not meet the eligibility criteria, some will decline and some will drop out during the screening process. The proportion likely to start TBPT depends on the screen used (e.g. using tuberculin skin test as a screening tool reduces the number that are eligible), and the type of VCT facility. If a VCT facility sees mostly hospital or clinical referrals, then a greater proportion would be expected to be sick and not eligible for treatment of latent TB infection. Higher proportions would be expected from sites linked to PMTCT or stand-alone VCT centers. Most programs would aim for between 30 and 50 percent, depending on the types of HIV testing and counseling facilities available. Platform: Modified HIV testing register, HIV care register or TBPT register Frequency: The data would be collected continuously and reported and analyzed quarterly REFERENCES ● World Health Organization (2004). Guide to monitoring and evaluation for collaborative TB/HIV activities (WHO/HTM/ TB/2004.342)
- 35. 35 TB/HIV INDICATOR (TB/HIV 4): PREVENTION OF HIV IN TB PATIENTS Number of registered TB patients who are tested for HIV, after giving consent, as a proportion of the total number of registered TB cases. RATIONALE To assess the uptake of HIV testing by TB patients. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Total number of TB patients, registered over a given time period, who are tested for HIV (after giving consent) during their TB treatment Denominator: Total number of TB patients, registered over the same given time period MEASUREMENT Ideally, all TB patients should be offered an HIV test and it is preferable that this occurs within the context of the TB service provider, in which case the HIV test can be recorded in the patient record and a modified TB register and reported quarterly with the outcome data. However, in some settings HIV counseling and testing will be carried out in a different part of the same facility or even at a distant site. Under these circumstances, a referral system will need to be established so that the TB program records when a TB patient is referred for an HIV test, and is notified when a TB patient attends counseling and whether or not they are tested for HIV. Such information should be collected at the TB facility level and recorded in the facility or district TB register. Patient confidentiality must be maintained. It is prefer- able that TB patients are tested at the start of TB treatment so that they can benefit from appropriate care throughout their TB treatment. However, some patients are reluctant to undertake an HIV test until later in their TB treatment, once they feel stronger. A recording and reporting system should be able to capture these late tests otherwise the total number of TB patients knowing their HIV status will be underreported. Although this indicator is similar to TB/HIV 1 which measures HIV prevalence through surveillance, this indicator measures the services’ ability to encourage HIV testing in TB patients under program conditions. If a high proportion of TB patients are tested (>80 percent) then this provides a sufficiently robust estimate of the true HIV prevalence among TB patients which can be used for surveillance purposes. Platform: Modified TB register, separate TB/HIV register or modified HIV counseling and testing register with quarterly analysis and reports. A referral mechanism and reporting of results between TB and HIV testing and counseling services will be needed if HIV testing is performed at a separate site to the TB clinic. Frequency: Data recorded continuously and reported and analyzed quarterly at the time of reporting outcome of TB treatment. Reporting at the end of TB treatment allows for HIV testing occurring and results being recorded at any time during TB treatment. Target: All TB patients should be offered an HIV test and ideally a high proportion (>80 percent) should actually have an HIV test. All TB patients who are tested for HIV should receive their results through post test counseling. REFERENCES ● World Health Organization (2004). Guide to monitoring and evaluation for collaborative TB/HIV activities (WHO/HTM/TB/2004.342) ● “Interim Policy on Collaborative TB/HIV Activities. WHO/HTM/HIV/2004.1 and WHO/HTM/TB/2004.330
- 36. 36 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex B: Description of TB/HIV Indicators TB/HIV INDICATOR (TB/HIV 5): PREVENTION OF HIV IN TB PATIENTS Number of registered TB patients who are tested for HIV (after giving consent) and who test HIV-positive, expressed as a proportion of the total number of all registered TB patients who are tested for HIV. RATIONALE To assess the prevalence of HIV among TB patients. Measuring the proportion of HIV-positive TB patients gives important information for targeting of resources, strategic planning of activities and monitoring the effectiveness of HIV prevention interventions over time. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Total number of all TB patients registered over a given time period who test HIV-positive (after giving consent) during their TB treatment Denominator: Total number of TB patients registered over the same given time period who are tested for HIV (after giving consent) MEASUREMENT In settings where HIV is driving the TB epidemic, all TB patients should be offered and encouraged to have an HIV test. National protocols for HIV counseling, testing and confirmation of results should be followed. It is preferable that HIV testing takes place early in the course of TB treatment so that TB patients receive optimal care depending on their HIV status. Some patients may not be prepared to have an HIV test immediately after being diagnosed with TB, and staff will need to encourage HIV testing at each follow-up visit for those who have not yet been tested. It is important, therefore, that the system is able to capture the results of an HIV test occurring at any time during a patient’s TB treatment. TB patients who consent to HIV testing may be tested within the TB service or, if HIV testing and counseling are not available within the service, be referred to a separate HIV testing and counseling service. In the latter situation, a mechanism for reporting HIV results back to the TB service will need to be established. It is crucial that the results of the HIV test are known to both the health care staff in charge of TB care and the patient. HIV status will influence patient care plans (e.g. referral to PLWHA support group, Co-trimoxazole Prophylactic Treatment (CPT), Antiretroviral therapy (ARV), avoidance of streptomycin injections or thiacetazone), and the risk of ongoing HIV trans- mission can be reduced with appropriate post-test counseling for the patient. Confidentiality of patient information must be maintained and patient HIV status must be accessible only to health care staff directly responsible for an individual’s care. HIV status can be recorded in facility and district TB registers. These TB registers should already be maintained confidentially as they contain patient specific health information; the addition of HIV status should there- fore not require any change in the way the registers are maintained. Facility-level staff and the district TB coordinator should be responsible for ensuring the confidentiality of this information. Platform: Modified TB register, separate TB/HIV register or modified HIV counseling and testing register, with quar- terly analysis and reports. A referral mechanism and reporting of results between TB and HIV testing and counseling services will be needed if HIV testing is performed at a separate site to the TB clinic. Frequency: Recorded continuously and reported and analyzed quarterly at the time of reporting outcome of TB treat- ment. Reporting at the end of TB treatment allows for HIV testing to take place and results to be recorded at any time during TB treatment. REFERENCES ● WHO. Guidelines for HIV surveillance in tuberculosis patients (WHO/HTM/TB/2004.339, WHO/HIV/2004.06, UNAIDS/04.30E) ● World Health Organization (2004). Guide to monitoring and evaluation for collaborative TB/HIV activities (WHO/HTM/ TB/2004.342)
- 37. 37 TB/HIV INDICATOR (TB/HIV 6): PREVENTION OF OPPORTUNISTIC INFECTION IN PLWHA WITH TB Number of HIV-positive TB patients who receive (given at least one dose) CPT during their TB treatment as a proportion of the total number of HIV-positive TB patients. RATIONALE To monitor commitment and capacity of programs to provide CPT to HIV-positive TB patients. It is important for programs to know the proportion of HIV-positive TB patients who receive this potentially life-saving therapy. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of HIV-positive TB patients, registered over a given time period, who receive (given at least one dose) CPT during their TB treatment Denominator: Total number of HIV-positive TB patients registered over the same given time period MEASUREMENT All HIV-positive TB patients should be given CPT during their TB treatment and lifelong thereafter 1 unless contraindi- cated or they receive ART and their CD4 cell count rises above 500/mm3. TB patients may have been identified as HIV positive and commenced on CPT prior to being diagnosed with TB; they should continue CPT throughout TB treatment and be included in the denominator. To gain maximum benefit, TB patients should commence CPT as soon as possible after HIV infection is diagnosed in a TB patient as mortality is highest early in the course of TB treatment. However, TB patients may not have access to HIV testing immediately after diagnosis of TB or may not wish to be tested until later in their TB treatment. To be able to include all HIV positive TB patients who start CPT during TB treatment, it will be necessary to assess and report this at the end of TB treatment. This can be achieved using a modified TB register or separate TB/HIV register in which to record HIV status and CPT. This data can then be reported along with the quar- terly cohort outcome data. The use in the definition of the clarifying statement – given at least one dose – is to capture all patients who have been assessed and started on treatment, it does not imply that one dose of CPT is sufficient. If CPT is not provided by the TB program but through HIV care or other services, a mechanism should be established to ensure that information about commencing CPT is passed on to, and recorded by, the NTP, again in a modified TB register or separate TB/HIV register. Platform: Modified TB register, a separate TB/HIV register, or a system to transfer data to TB program if CPT provided outside the TB service. Frequency: The data should be collected continuously and reported and analyzed quarterly at the end of TB treatment along with the outcome of TB treatment. REFERENCES ● Provisional WHO/UNAIDS Secretariat recommendations on the use of cotrimoxazole prophylaxis in adults and children living with HIV/AIDS in Africa www.unaids.org/publications/documents/care/general/recommendations-eng.pdf ● World Health Organization (2004). Guide to monitoring and evaluation for collaborative TB/HIV activities (WHO/HTM/ TB/2004.342) ● “Interim Policy on Collaborative TB/HIV Activities. WHO/HTM/HIV/2004.1 and WHO/HTM/TB/2004.330 1 Provisional WHO/UNAIDS secretariat recommendations on the use of co-trimoxazole prophylaxis in adults and children living with HIV/AIDS in Africa. Geneva, Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS and WHO www.unaids.org/en/other/functionalities/ViewDocument.asp?href= http://gva-doc-owl/WEBcontent/Documents/pub/Publications/IRC-pub04/recommendation_en%26%2346;pdf (accessed 24/05/04).
- 38. 38 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex B: Description of TB/HIV Indicators TB/HIV INDICATOR (TB/HIV 7): HIV CARE AND SUPPORT FOR HIV-POSITIVE TB PATIENTS Number of HIV-positive TB patients referred to HIV care and support services (as defined in local or national HIV/AIDS policy) during TB treatment, expressed as a proportion of the total number of HIV-positive TB patients. RATIONALE To measure commitment and capacity of TB service to ensure that HIV-positive TB patients are able to access the care and support services that are available. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of HIV-positive TB patients, registered over a given time period, who are referred to HIV care and support services during their TB treatment* (*This may be reported as a composite indicator of referral to any HIV care and support services or may be broken down and reported by each individual service, e.g. number referred to PMTCT, number referred to PLWHA support group. Referral to ART services should be excluded as this is covered separately.) Denominator: Total number of HIV positive TB patients registered over the same given time period MEASUREMENT The means to measure this indicator will depend on what services are available for PLWHA and where they are provided. All HIV care and support services may be provided at one site, in which case only one referral will be necessary. It will be relatively straightforward to record such referrals in a modified TB register or separate register for HIV-positive TB patients by use of a checkbox. It is more likely that the range of care and support services will be offered by a variety of providers at different sites. It may therefore be necessary to have a checklist of services in the TB or TB/HIV register where referral to each available service can be recorded. Diagnosis of HIV may occur at any time during TB treatment – and the need for referral to specific services may also arise at any time during TB treatment. It is therefore important that the information for this indicator be collected and reported at the end of TB treatment with the quarterly cohort outcome data. Data can be collected as a single indicator, i.e. number of HIV-positive TB patients who are referred to any HIV care and support service during their TB treatment. Alternatively, if more detailed information is required for program management, these data can be reported by each separate care and support service, e.g. number of HIV-positive TB patients who are referred to PLWHA support group, number of HIV-positive TB patients who are referred to PMTCT service. Referral to ART services should not be included as it is detailed in separate indicator. Platform: Modified TB register or a separate TB/HIV register Frequency: The data should be collected continuously and reported and analyzed quarterly with data on cohort outcomes REFERENCES ● World Health Organization (2004). Guide to monitoring and evaluation for collaborative TB/HIV activities (WHO/HTM/ TB/2004.342) ● Interim Policy on Collaborative TB/HIV Activities. WHO/HTM/HIV/2004.1 and WHO/HTM/TB/2004.330
- 39. 39 TB/HIV INDICATOR (TB/HIV 8): PROVISION OF ANTIRETROVIRAL TREATMENT FOR TB PATIENTS DURING TB TREATMENT Number of HIV-positive registered TB patients who are started on or continue previously initiated ART, during or at the end of TB treatment, as a proportion of all HIV-positive registered TB patients. RATIONALE Outcome indicator to measure commitment and capacity of TB service to ensure that HIV-positive TB patients are able to access ART. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: All HIV-positive TB patients, registered over a given time period, who receive ART (are started on or continue previously initiated ART) Denominator: All HIV-positive TB patients registered over the same given time period MEASUREMENT Data collection methods will depend on who provides ART for TB patients. In settings where TB patients are assessed for eligibility and placed on ART by TB program staff, data for this indicator can be captured in a modified TB register or separate TB/HIV register. The data should be reported at the completion of TB treatment in order to include all TB patients started on ART at any time over the course of their TB treatment. In settings where TB patients are referred to HIV or other care services to be assessed and commenced on ART, a system must be established to ensure that the TB program is informed of the outcome of the referral i.e. whether or not TB patients are commenced on ART or not, and that this information is recorded in a modified TB register or TB/HIV register. Not only is this important for program management, it is also important for individual patient care. TB staff members need to be aware if a TB patient is commenced on ART so that they can manage drug reactions and interactions appropriately. TB patients may be commenced on ART at any time during their TB treatment. Commencement of ART may be delayed due to delay in HIV testing or to reduce the risk of drug interactions occurring in the intensive phase. The data collection methods should be able to capture ART treatment starting at any time during TB treatment. Platform: Modified TB register, modified HIV care register or separate TB/HIV register with referral system (where appropriate) Frequency: The data would be collected continuously and reported with the quarterly cohort outcome data REFERENCES ● World Health Organization (2004). Guide to monitoring and evaluation for collaborative TB/HIV activities (WHO/HTM/ TB/2004.342) ● Interim Policy on Collaborative TB/HIV Activities. WHO/HTM/HIV/2004.1 and WHO/HTM/TB/2004.330
- 40. 40 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex B: Description of TB/HIV Indicators TB/HIV INDICATOR (TB/HIV 9): HIV SEROPREVALENCE AMONG TB PATIENTS Number of all newly-registered TB patients who are HIV-positive, expressed as a proportion of all newly-registered TB patients. RATIONALE Surveillance of HIV prevalence among TB patients will give information about the epidemics of both TB and HIV. In particular, it gives an indication of the degree of overlap in the epidemics in any given setting and when compared with the HIV prevalence in the general population, will give an indication of the contribution that HIV is making to the TB epidemic in any given setting. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Total number of newly-registered TB patients who are HIV positive, over a given time period Denominator: Total number of newly-registered TB patients (registered over the same given time period) who were tested for HIV and included in the surveillance system MEASUREMENT1 Selecting the appropriate strategy for HIV surveillance among TB patients will depend mainly on the existing surveil- lance system and the underlying HIV epidemic state in a country. There are three main methods for surveillance of HIV among TB patients: Routine HIV testing data can form the basis of a reliable surveillance system at all levels of HIV epidemic (low-level, concentrated, generalized 2 ), provided that high coverage is achieved (more than 80 percent of all TB patients giving consent and being tested). These routine data can be calibrated by periodic (special) or sentinel surveys. Sentinel surveillance collects information in a regular and consistent way from a predetermined number of persons from specific sites and population groups that are of particular interest or are representative of a larger population. The difficulty with sentinel surveillance is in determining how representative they are of the population from which they are taken and also how representative they are of the general population of TB patients. Sentinel surveillance systems are usually based on unlinked anonymous testing methods, often using blood specimens that have been collected for other purposes and stripped of all identifying markers. Periodic special surveys have a specific role where the preva- lence of HIV among TB patients has not been previously estimated and are an essential part of the initial assessment of the situation. Surveys using representative sampling methods and appropriate sample sizes can provide accurate estimates of the burden of HIV in TB patients. This information may alert TB programs to a potential HIV problem and enable action to be taken which may include the institution of more systematic surveillance. Ideally surveillance of HIV prevalence should include all newly registered TB patients, diagnosed according to interna- tional standards. 3 However, if periodic special surveys or sentinel methods are used and resources are limited, coun- tries may choose to include only adult smear-positive pulmonary patients i.e. those with a definitive diagnosis of TB. Countries with scarce resources where the HIV epidemic state is either low or concentrated may also choose to only include a smaller subgroup of TB patients e.g. adults aged 15-59 years. Relapse cases should be excluded from surveillance systems, because of the risk of surveying the same patient twice, unless they are identified as such and the results are analyzed separately. However, relapse cases may be included and need not be identified as such if surveillance is based on survey methods and these surveys are undertaken over a short period of time, ideally less than 2 -3 months. 1 Further detail on HIV surveillance in TB patients can be found in the WHO Revised guidelines for the surveillance of HIV among people with TB (in preparation). 2 Classified according to the WHO definitions Low level HIV epidemic: HIV prevalence has not consistently exceeded 5% in any defined sub-population at risk of HIV. Concentrated: HIV prevalence consistently over 5% in at least one defined sub-population but HIV prevalence below 1% in pregnant women in urban areas Generalized: HIV prevalence consistently above 1% in pregnant women in urban areas. World Health Organization /UNAIDS. Guidelines for second generation HIV surveillance. Geneva: World Health Organization and the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS; 2000. WHO document WHO/CDS/CSR/EDC/2000.5 & UNAIDS/00.03E. 3 World Health Organization. WHO Treatment of tuberculosis guidelines for National programs, 2003. WHO document WHO/CDS/TB.
- 41. 41 All countries with a generalized HIV epidemic state should aim to ensure that HIV counseling and testing are offered and actively promoted to all TB patients, in conjunction with ART where possible. These routine data should be used as the basis for surveillance, if >80 percent of TB patients are tested. These routine data can be calibrated by periodic special or sentinel surveys. In the absence of universal access to HIV testing and counseling for all TB patients, special surveys or sentinel surveys are suitable alternatives. In countries with a concentrated epidemic state, HIV counseling and testing for all TB patients should form the basis for the surveillance. If this system is not yet in place, then periodic (special) surveys or sentinel surveys are suitable alternatives. In countries with a low level HIV epidemic state where HIV testing is not routinely offered to TB patients, special surveys or sentinel surveys can be conducted at two to three yearly intervals. At present there is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of sputum testing for HIV as a valid alternative to sero- logical tests for HIV surveillance. Platform: Routine data from HIV counseling and testing of TB patients collected continuously in a modified TB register or separate TB/HIV register, sentinel surveillance or special surveys. Frequency: In the absence of a national recording and reporting system where data are continuously collected and reported quarterly, data should be collected every 2-3 years. In countries where HIV prevalence level in TB patients is low (<5 percent) and which have a stable and low HIV epidemic state and TB burden in the general population, periodic surveys may be repeated at 5 yearly intervals. In resource poor countries, where the HIV and TB burden in the general population may be concentrated or generalized, but where the institution of more systematic methods of surveillance is not possible, special surveys should be undertaken at least every three to five years. REFERENCES ● WHO. Guidelines for HIV surveillance in tuberculosis patients (WHO/HTM/TB/2004.339, WHO/HIV/2004.06, UNAIDS/04.30E) ● World Health Organization (2004). Guide to monitoring and evaluation for collaborative TB/HIV activities (WHO/HTM/ TB/2004.342)
- 43. ANNEX C: Description of Tuberculosis Indicators
- 44. 44 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex C: Description of Tuberculosis Indicators TUBERCULOSIS INDICATOR (TB 1): IDENTIFICATION OF INFECTIOUS CASES New smear-positive TB cases detected under DOTS Proportion of new smear-positive TB cases detected among the total estimated number of new smear-positive TB cases per year. RATIONALE This indicator measures the DOTS program’s ability to detect and identify smear-positive cases. If a country has low case detection, it may reflect incomplete reporting, limited coverage or utilization of facilities that provide DOTS, or insufficient referral of TB suspects for diagnosis. Low case detection may indicate that supplemental approaches to detecting new cases may be required. For example, the country may explore implementing DOTS in the private and NGO sectors as well as other areas where cases would be likely to present themselves. It is possible for the calculated detection rate to exceed 100 percent due to intense case finding in an area that has a backlog of chronic cases, over- reporting, over-diagnosis and the under-estimation of incidence. A case detection rate of 70 percent or greater is the national or global target. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Annual number of new smear-positive TB cases detected Denominator: Total annual number of estimated new smear-positive TB cases (incidence) MEASUREMENT Measurement of this indicator is done at national level only, on an annual basis. The numerator is the number of smear-positive cases reported to the national TB control program (reports ultimately come from TB registers in each operational unit). The denominator is the estimated number of new smear-positive cases annually countrywide, an estimation made by WHO. (These estimations are reported every year by WHO in the annual “Global Tuberculosis Control” report.) Platform: Quarterly reports; WHO estimated incidence for countries Frequency: Annually Level: National REFERENCES ● WHO. Compendium for monitoring TB control activities (WHO/HTM/TB/2004.344) ● WHO. Global Tuberculosis Control Report 2004 (WHO/HTN/TB/2004.331, www.who.int/gtb)
- 45. 45 TUBERCULOSIS INDICATOR (TB 2): TIMELY DETECTION AND QUALITY TREATMENT OF CASES Population covered by DOTS Percentage of the population living in administrative areas that are defined as DOTS areas. RATIONALE This indicator is a simple easily collected measure of the availability of DOTS within a country that is useful particularly in the early stages of DOTS implementation. It only measures availability of DOTS services within a given administrative area; it does not measure access or equality of access to those services. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Population living in administrative areas that are defined as DOTS areas, as per national guidelines Denominator: Total population of all administrative areas MEASUREMENT This indicator can be calculated quarterly or annually. Ideally, a national TB control program will have recorded the year/quarter when each administrative unit (e.g., district) officially became a “DOTS” unit, as per national guidelines, and will also have available (from the appropriate Ministry) the populations living in these administrative units. Platform: NTP records; census data Frequency: Annually Target: The target is to make DOTS available to 100 percent of the population REFERENCES ● WHO. Global Tuberculosis Control Report 2004. www.who.int/gtb/publications/globrep/index.html ● WHO. Compendium for monitoring TB control activities (WHO/HTM/TB/2004.344)
- 46. 46 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex C: Description of Tuberculosis Indicators TUBERCULOSIS INDICATOR (TB 3): TIMELY DETECTION AND QUALITY TREATMENT OF CASES Smear-positive TB cases registered under DOTS who are successfully treated Percent of new smear-positive pulmonary TB cases that are successfully treated. RATIONALE Evaluation of successful treatment outcomes of new pulmonary smear-positive patients is used to determine the quality and effectiveness of DOTS implementation at all levels. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of new smear-positive pulmonary TB cases registered under DOTS in a specified period that subsequently were successfully treated (sum of WHO outcome categories ‘cured’ plus ‘treatment completed’) Denominator: Total number of new smear-positive pulmonary TB cases registered under DOTS in the same period MEASUREMENT Each sputum smear-positive TB case is assigned a treatment outcome, which is recorded in the TB Register. Outcomes for all cases are reported by registration period (usually a quarter) one year after initial registration. Platform: TB Register; quarterly reports of treatment outcomes (TB-08) Frequency: Quarterly and annually Target: A treatment success rate of 85 percent or greater is the global target REFERENCES ● WHO. Compendium for monitoring TB control activities (WHO/HTM/TB/2004.344)
- 47. 47 TUBERCULOSIS INDICATOR (TB 4): TIMELY DETECTION AND QUALITY TREATMENT OF CASES Sputum conversion rate at the end of initial phase of treatment Percentage of new smear-positive pulmonary TB cases registered in a specified period that converted to smear-negative at the end of initial phase of treatment. RATIONALE The majority of new smear-positive pulmonary TB patients should convert their smear to negative after two or three months of treatment, depending on national guidelines. However, at two months, good laboratory technicians can often detect low grades of positivity, and the positivity rate can still be as high as 25 percent, even if the initial phase of treatment is well supervised and the drugs are of good quality. Sputum conversion has treatment implications since, in some countries, patients who have not converted their sputum smears after two months of treatment should extend the initial phase of therapy. Low rates of smear conversion after the initial phase of treatment among retreatment patients are an indication of possible drug resistance. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of new smear-positive pulmonary TB cases registered in a specified period that are smear- negative at the end of the initial phase of treatment Denominator: Total number of new smear-positive pulmonary TB cases registered for treatment in the same period MEASUREMENT Both the numerator and the denominator can be obtained from the quarterly report on smear conversion (or program management) or from the TB register. Platform: Quarterly reports on smear conversion; TB register Frequency: Quarterly and annually REFERENCES ● WHO. Compendium for monitoring TB control activities (WHO/HTM/TB/2004.344)
- 48. 48 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex C: Description of Tuberculosis Indicators TUBERCULOSIS INDICATOR (TB 5): TIMELY DETECTION AND QUALITY TREATMENT OF CASES Re-treatment of TB cases Percentage of TB cases that are registered as re-treatment cases, among all TB cases registered during a specified time period. RATIONALE This indicator represents the percentage of TB patients who require more extensive treatment and should be suspected of having acquired drug resistance. Ineffective treatment or incorrect administration of medication may result in a large proportion of retreatment cases, which points to deficiencies in the medication used and/or nonadherence to DOTS on the part of patients and providers. INITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of re-treatment TB cases registered during a specified time period* Denominator: Total number of TB cases registered in the same period * Re-treatment includes all previously treated patients (treatment-after-default, treatment-after-failure, and relapse cases) who are newly registered for treatment. MEASUREMENT The numerator can be obtained from the TB register or from the quarterly report on TB registration. The denominator can also be obtained from the TB register. Platform: Quarterly reports on TB case registration; TB register Frequency: Quarterly and annually REFERENCES ● WHO. Compendium for monitoring TB control activities (WHO/HTM/TB/2004.344)
- 49. 49 TUBERCULOSIS INDICATOR (TB 6): TIMELY DETECTION AND QUALITY TREATMENT OF CASES New smear-positive pulmonary TB cases reported to the NTP per year The number of new smear-positive pulmonary TB cases reported to the NTP per year per 100,000 population. RATIONALE The numerator provides information on the number of infectious TB cases detected. Because effective treatment of infectious TB patients reduces TB transmission, early detection is one of the main strategies of TB control, and the indicator measures the program’s capacity to identify those sources. Information on true incidence or prevalence of TB disease is unlikely to be available. However, the number of cases reported can be compared with incidence estimates to detect deficiencies in case detection and registration. Trends over time in case notification usually indicate changes in program coverage and capacity to detect TB cases; at high levels of case detection, the indicator reflects changes in the prevalence of TB in the community. INITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: The total number of new smear-positive TB patients notified to the NTP per year Denominator: Total population in the specified area MEASUREMENT The numerator can be obtained from reports at the national level for the previous year. The denominator can be obtained from census data. Platform: Quarterly reports on TB case registration; Census statistics Frequency: Annually REFERENCES ● WHO Compendium for monitoring TB control activities (WHO/HTM/TB/2004.344)
- 50. 50 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex C: Description of Tuberculosis Indicators TUBERCULOSIS INDICATOR (TB 7): TIMELY DETECTION AND QUALITY TREATMENT OF CASES Smear positivity among TB suspects The number and percentage of persons found to be smear-positive cases of TB, among persons identified as TB suspects clinically during a specified time period. RATIONALE This indicator measures case detection effort among health staff. Increased case detection effort should lead to increased case detection. The target for this indicator should be around 10 percent. A value higher than 10 percent may indicate that clinicians are not fully aware of TB symptoms and send only those patients at advanced stages of TB for sputum examination. When X-rays are used as a filter to select patients who should have a sputum smear examina- tion, positivity rates are expected to be higher than 10 percent. A value less than 10 percent may indicate that the clini- cians are referring too many “suspects” for sputum smear examination, and laboratory services can be overburdened with unnecessary negative examinations, which could compromise the quality of their work. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of TB suspects found to be smear positive during a specified period Denominator: Number of TB suspects identified clinically during the same period MEASUREMENT The numerator and denominator can be obtained from the TB laboratory register or a “cough register” maintained at the treatment facility. This register lists all TB suspects who have been referred for chest X-ray and/or sputum smear examinations. In this case, each facility – and the district as a whole – can calculate the indicator. In addition, the health facility can monitor the number of suspects identified per patient population (e.g. per outpa- tient visits), and the district as a whole can monitor the number of suspects identified per population. Platform: TB laboratory register or a “cough register” Frequency: Quarterly and annually REFERENCES ● WHO. Compendium for monitoring TB control activities (WHO/HTM/TB/2004.344)
- 51. ANNEX D: Description of Malaria Indicators
- 52. 52 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex D: Description of Malaria Indicators PREVENTION INDICATOR (MALARIA-PI 1): INSECTICIDE TREATED NETS (ITNs) ITNs distributed to people Number of mosquito nets distributed to people at risk. RATIONALE In areas of high malaria transmission and poor access to facility-based health care, particularly in rural Africa, ITNs are the principal strategy for malaria prevention. ITNs have been shown to reduce malaria-related morbidity and mortality in areas of high and moderate endemicity in sub-Saharan Africa, and to reduce malaria-related morbidity in various Asian settings of moderate endemicity. In Latin American countries ITNs have been shown to reduce malaria morbidity at the same level as in African settings. However, in both, Latin American and Asian countries, ITNs efficacy shows a much higher variability than in African countries due to different mosquito vectors. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Number of mosquito nets distributed to people living in malaria-endemic areas, with the mosquito nets being limited to nets that were treated with insecticide within the last 12 months (pretreated nets or nets distributed together with treatment kit) or Long-lasting Insecticidal Nets (LLIN). Note: It may be considered to add numbers of net treatment kits distributed to people living in malaria-endemic areas to the number of nets, for GFATM-funded programs in which treatment kits are distributed for the (immediate) treat- ment of existing nets in the community other than ITNs distributed in the same grant. However, this should never be done for net treatment kits used for the first impregnation of ITNs. MEASUREMENT This indicator is derived from data recorded by the malaria control program. Nets received by persons at risk must not be equated with the nets distributed to the point of service delivery (e.g. EPI clinics or antenatal clinics) – because important delays could still occur in the last stage of the distribution, from service delivery point to persons targeted. (In other words, ‘’received by’’ persons at risk denotes ‘distributed to persons targeted, from the service delivery point’.) Although this indicator thus is meant to be the one, among service delivery indicators, closest to predicting net owner- ship and usage within households, it should not be equated with either of those latter indicators – which are to be measured through household surveys (see MALARIA-PI 2). Platform: Records from National Malaria Control Programs and other relevant sources Frequency: Quarterly
- 53. 53 PREVENTION INDICATOR (MALARIA-PI 2): INSECTICIDE TREATED NETS (ITNs) Households owning ITNs Proportion of households owning at least one insecticide-treated net. RATIONALE In areas of high malaria transmission and poor access to facility-based health care, particularly in rural Africa, ITNs are the principal strategy for malaria prevention. ITNs have been shown to reduce malaria-related morbidity and mortality in areas of high and moderate endemicity in sub-Saharan Africa, but also in Latin American and Asian countries. While ownership of nets without usage would not protect against malaria, net ownership has been shown to predict rates of actual net usage. Moreover, there is evidence of a ‘community effect’ where promptly treated ITNs are associated with reductions in all-cause child mortality and malaria-related morbidity among children who do not themselves sleep under an ITN but live within close proximity to households with ITNs. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of households surveyed within malaria-endemic areas with at least one mosquito net which has been treated within the last 12 months or is a Long-lasting Insecticidal Net (LLIN) Denominator: Total number of households surveyed within malaria-endemic areas Note: Analysis and reporting by province and according to urban/rural setting is recommended. MEASUREMENT This indicator requires data collected at the household level from representative sample surveys. In countries where most of the population lives at risk of endemic malaria, such as in tropical Africa, surveys ideally are nationwide, such as DHS and MICS. In countries where only part of the population lives at endemic risk, ITNs are only relevant for households in at- risk areas, and surveys must take a representative sample of the area at endemic risk, with the survey report clearly describing sampling design and definition of population-at-risk used. Alternatively, in such countries, areas without endemic malaria must be identified so that they may be excluded during the analysis when data were collected through nationally representative household surveys. The limited number of questions required to measure this indicator can be easily added to any representative house- hold sample survey. It is important that ITN possession be assessed through a household questionnaire, rather than a questionnaire concerning individuals, as individuals may not be representative of household possession. Survey design and sample size should be chosen so as to allow comparisons between provinces and urban/rural strata at the house- hold level. The numerator for this indicator is obtained from asking household respondent if there is a mosquito net in the house that can be used to avoid being bitten while sleeping, and whether any such net has been treated in the last 12 months or is a Long-lasting Insecticidal Net (LLIN). The denominator is simply the total number of surveyed households. Suggested questions: Questions 1.1, 1.3 and 1.4 of the ‘Malaria-add-on household questions’ in the 2004 Guidelines for core indicators for assessing malaria intervention coverage from household surveys. Platform: DHS (USAID/MACRO), MICS (UNICEF), MIS, ‘Rider’ on other representative sample surveys Frequency: Every 2-3 years ➪
- 54. 54 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex D: Description of Malaria Indicators REFERENCES ● Roll Back Malaria/MEASURE. Guidelines for core indicators for assessing malaria intervention coverage from household surveys. July 2004. Available online: rbm.who.int/partnership/wg/wg_monitoring/docs/GuidelinesForCorePopulationFINAL9-20_Malaria.pdf ● Roll Back Malaria. Malaria Indicator Survey (MIS): rbm.who.int/merg, section ‘Survey and Indicator Guidance Task Force’ ● UNICEF Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey: www.unicef.org/statistics/index_24302.html ● MEASURE Demographic and Health Surveys: www.measuredhs.com/
- 55. 55 PREVENTION INDICATOR (MALARIA-PI 3): INSECTICIDE TREATED NETS (ITNs) Children under five using ITNs Proportion of children under five who slept under an ITN the previous night. RATIONALE In areas of intense malaria transmission, malaria-related morbidity and mortality is concentrated in young children, and use of ITNs by children under five has been demonstrated to considerably reduce malaria disease incidence, malar- ia-related anemia, and all-cause under-five mortality. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of children under five years old surveyed in malaria endemic areas who slept under a mosquito net the previous night, which has been treated within the last 12 months or is a Long- lasting Insecticidal Net (LLIN) Denominator: Total number of children under five years old who slept the previous night in surveyed households within malaria-endemic areas Note: Analysis and reporting by province and according to urban/rural setting is recommended. MEASUREMENT This indicator requires data collected from representative household sample surveys. In countries where most of the population lives at risk of endemic malaria, such as in tropical Africa, surveys ideally are nationwide, such as DHS and MICS. In countries where only part of the population lives at endemic risk, ITNs are only relevant for households in at- risk areas, and surveys must take a representative sample of the area at endemic risk, with the survey report clearly describing sampling design and definition of population at risk used. Alternatively, in such countries, areas without endemic malaria must be identified so that they may be excluded during the analysis when data were collected through nationally representative household surveys. The limited number of questions required to measure this indicator can be easily added to any representative sample survey. It is crucial that the survey contains a household listing that captures the total number of children under five years old within each surveyed household. Survey design and sample size should be chosen so as to allow comparisons between provinces and urban/rural strata at the individual (child) level. The data for the denominator is obtained during the household listing procedure when every child under five who slept in the house the previous night is identified. The numerator is then obtained from a listing of children in the house who slept under a mosquito net the previous night, in combination with information on whether the net had been treated with insecticide within the last 12 months or is a Long-lasting Insecticidal Net (LLIN) Suggested questions: Questions 1.1 and 1.3-1.6 from the ‘Malaria-add-on household questions’ in the 2004 Guidelines for core indicators for assessing malaria intervention coverage from household surveys Platform: DHS (USAID/MACRO), MICS (UNICEF), MIS, ‘Rider’ on other representative sample surveys Frequency: Every 2-3 years ➪
- 56. 56 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex D: Description of Malaria Indicators REFERENCES ● Roll Back Malaria/MEASURE. Guidelines for core indicators for assessing malaria intervention coverage from household surveys. July 2004. Available online: rbm.who.int/partnership/wg/wg_monitoring/docs/GuidelinesForCorePopulationFINAL9 ● Roll Back Malaria. Malaria Indicator Survey (MIS): rbm.who.int/merg, section ‘Survey and Indicator Guidance Task Force’ ● UNICEF Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey: www.unicef.org/statistics/index_24302.html ● MEASURE Demographic and Health Surveys: www.measuredhs.com/
- 57. 57 PREVENTION INDICATOR (MALARIA-PI 4): MALARIA PREVENTION DURING PREGNANCY Pregnant women using ITNs Proportion of pregnant women who slept under an ITN the previous night. RATIONALE In areas of stable endemic malaria transmission (such as tropical Africa) where most malaria infections in adults are asymptomatic, ITN use by pregnant women reduces malaria-related maternal morbidity and improves birth outcomes, including a reduction in the incidence of low birth weight. Coverage of pregnant women with ITNs is therefore a key component of the technical strategy for control and prevention of malaria advocated by WHO Roll Back Malaria (RBM), for areas of stable endemic malaria transmission. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of pregnant women at risk for malaria in areas of stable endemic malaria transmission who slept under a mosquito net the previous night, which has been treated within the last 12 months or is a Long-lasting Insecticidal Net (LLIN) Denominator: Total number of pregnant women who reside within surveyed households within malaria-endemic areas Note: Analysis and reporting by province and according to urban/rural setting is recommended. MEASUREMENT This indicator is relevant only in areas of stable endemic malaria transmission. It is best measured through representa- tive household sample surveys. In most countries which have distribution of ITNs to pregnant women as an official malaria control policy (such as tropical Africa), malaria transmission is intense and covers most of the population and surveys measuring usage of ITNs by pregnant women should, ideally, be nation-wide. In countries where only part of the population lives at endemic risk, areas without endemic malaria must be identified so that they may be excluded from this indicator during the analysis phase of data collected through nationally repre- sentative household surveys. The limited number of questions required to measure this indicator can be easily added to any representative sample survey. However, due to small number of women who are pregnant at the time of any given survey, only surveys with a sample size of over 5,000 women (such as MICS and DHS) can be expected to generate useful data for this indicator. Furthermore, it is important that the survey contains a household listing that captures all women of reproductive age within each surveyed household. Survey’s design and sample size should ideally be chosen so as to allow comparisons between provinces and urban/rural strata at the individual level. The data for the denominator is obtained from a series of questions asked of all women of reproductive age in the household about their current pregnancy status. The data for the numerator is then obtained from a listing of these pregnant women that slept under a mosquito net the previous night, in combination with information on whether the net had been treated with insecticide within the last 12 months or is a Long-lasting Insecticidal Net (LLIN). Suggested questions: 1.1, 1.3-1.6, and 2.1 from the ‘Malaria-add-on-household-questions’ in the 2004 Guidelines for core indicators for assessing malaria intervention coverage from household surveys. Platform: DHS (USAID/MACRO), MICS (UNICEF), MIS, ‘Rider’ on other representative and large enough surveys Frequency: Every 2-3 years ➪
- 58. 58 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex D: Description of Malaria Indicators REFERENCES ● Roll Back Malaria/MEASURE. Guidelines for core indicators for assessing malaria intervention coverage from household surveys. July 2004. rbm.who.int/partnership/wg/wg_monitoring/docs/GuidelinesForCorePopulationFINAL9 ● Roll Back Malaria. Malaria Indicator Survey (MIS): rbm.who.int/merg, section ‘Survey and Indicator Guidance Task Force’ ● UNICEF Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey: www.unicef.org/statistics/index_24302.html ● MEASURE Demographic and Health Surveys: www.measuredhs.com/
- 59. 59 PREVENTION INDICATOR (MALARIA-PI 5): MALARIA PREVENTION DURING PREGNANCY Pregnant women receiving Intermittent Preventive Therapy (IPT) Proportion of pregnant women in stable endemic areas receiving intermittent preventive therapy (IPT). RATIONALE In areas of stable endemic malaria transmission such as tropical Africa, IPT of pregnant women with a recommended antimalarial drug* reduces the risk of maternal anemia, placental parasitemia, and low birth weight. IPT in pregnancy is therefore a key component of the technical strategy for control and prevention of malaria advocated by Roll Back Malaria (RBM), for areas of stable endemic malaria transmission. The definition and measurement method for this indicator (as described below) will depend on whether it is obtained through a community-based household survey or through the routine health management information system (HMIS). 1. IPT information obtained through household surveys DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of surveyed women in stable endemic areas who received at least two doses of a recom- mended antimalarial drug treatment to prevent malaria, during their last pregnancy that led to a live birth within the last 2 years Denominator: Total number of women surveyed in malaria-endemic areas who delivered a live baby within the last 2 years Note: Analysis and reporting by province and according to urban/rural setting is recommended. MEASUREMENT Surveys measuring this indicator must be representative household sample surveys. The limited number of questions required to measure this indicator can be easily added to any nationally-representative sample survey. It is important that the survey contain a household listing that captures all women of reproductive age within each surveyed house- hold, as well as a women’s questionnaire collecting data on previous births and antenatal care. Due to the limited number of women who delivered a live baby within the two years preceding any survey, care should be taken to ensure such surveys are designed with sufficient sample size, ideally still allowing comparisons between provinces and urban/ rural strata at the individual level. Data from the women’s questionnaires on all women in surveyed households who delivered a live baby within the two years preceding the survey are used to calculate the denominator. The numerator is the number of women who mention having taken the recommended drug* for prevention of malaria (as opposed to treatment of acute malaria disease episodes). Suggested questions: 2.2-2.7 from the ‘Malaria-add-on-household-questions’ in the 2004 Guidelines for core indica- tors for assessing malaria intervention coverage from household surveys Platform: DHS (USAID/MACRO), MICS (UNICEF), MIS, ‘Rider’ on other nationally representative surveys Frequency: Every 2-3 years * As of 2005, the most effective drug for IPT is sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) and all countries with IPT included in their national malaria control policy, defined this to be the case. ➪
- 60. 60 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex D: Description of Malaria Indicators 2. IPT information obtained through HMIS DEFINITION OF INDICATOR: HMIS Numerator: Number of pregnant women in stable endemic areas who received at least two doses of intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) with a recommended antimalarial drug during antenatal care (ANC) visit under direct observation Denominator: Total number of first ANC visits The indicator should be collected at routine ANC visits using the ANC register. To avoid duplication of work, the existing ANC register should be modified to include a column to record the doses of IPT dispensed. ANC cards should also be adapted to include a record of IPT doses taken. IPT should be administered under direct observation of the health worker, to maximize compliance; the column should not be marked if the dose is not observed directly. In case no IPT is dispensed, the reasons should be marked in the column comments (e.g. stockout, allergic, refused, treatment for illness, etc.). Frequency: Continuous, with monthly reporting 3. General comments for both measurement methods It is important to differentiate between usage of an antimalarial drug for prevention of malaria, as prescribed for IPT, and usage of an antimalarial drug for treatment (cure) of acute malaria disease episodes that may occur during a preg- nancy – which does not count as IPT. Similarly, usage of weekly chloroquine prophylaxis for malaria prevention must not be considered as IPT – as this is no longer effective in most settings with a high burden of falciparum malaria. The advantage of survey-based measurement is that it covers the whole population of pregnant women, including the typical 10 percent that do not attend antenatal care. The advantage of measurement through HIS is that it meas- ures IPT coverage at current time, and analysis can be targeted to facilities where IPT is actually being implemented. The disadvantage of surveys is that their results refer to pregnancies that occurred up to two years prior to the time of survey, and hence provide outdated data. REFERENCES ● Roll Back Malaria/MEASURE. Guidelines for core indicators for assessing malaria intervention coverage from household surveys. July 2004. rbm.who.int/partnership/wg/wg_monitoring/docs/GuidelinesForCorePopulationFINAL9 ● Roll Back Malaria. Malaria Indicator Survey (MIS): rbm.who.int/merg, section ‘Survey and Indicator Guidance Task Force’ ● UNICEF Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey: www.unicef.org/statistics/index_24302.html ● MEASURE Demographic and Health Surveys: www.measuredhs.com/
- 61. 61 PREVENTION INDICATOR (MALARIA-PI 6): VECTOR CONTROL Houses in areas at risk covered with Indoor Residual Spraying Proportion of houses in areas at risk of malaria transmission that were sprayed with insecticide in the past 12 months. RATIONALE In areas of intense malaria transmission, IRS and ITNs are alternative means for malaria vector control. In areas exposed to unstable or epidemic malaria, IRS has some important advantages: it is particularly useful for achieving a rapid reduction in malaria transmission and it can be targeted to the communities at highest risk. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of houses in areas at risk of malaria transmission that were sprayed with insecticide in the past 12 months Denominator: Number of targeted houses in areas at risk of malaria transmission MEASUREMENT A critical element in measuring this indicator is the definition of areas at risk of malaria transmission. Although WHO currently does not prescribe any standardized risk definition, it is crucial that any report on vector control coverage specifies the local definition used. It is possible that a control program targets only a part of the area at risk of malaria for IRS with the remaining risk area being targeted for ITNs instead. For comparability of data between countries and over time, any report on IRS coverage must therefore clearly specify whether coverage is measured against the total population at risk or against the targeted part of the population at risk. The threshold frequency of conducting spraying is set at once per year, which is the minimum frequency likely to be effective in significantly reducing malaria transmission. Alternative measurement methods: In the absence of data on houses sprayed, IRS coverage could alternatively be estimated from quantities of insecticide used for IRS, by assuming a specific application rate for each insecticide and an average sprayable area per house, e.g. 250m 2 . In areas where spraying programs are highly decentralized or where monitoring efforts at the national level are less developed, the inclusion of questions on IRS coverage in household surveys (e.g. a Malaria Indicator Survey) might be useful. Platform: Houses sprayed from records from National Malaria Control Programs; total houses in areas at malaria risk from national censuses Frequency: Every 1 year REFERENCES ● Roll Back Malaria. Malaria Indicator Survey (MIS): http://rbm.who.int/merg, section ’Survey and Indicator Guidance Task Force’
- 62. 62 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex D: Description of Malaria Indicators PREVENTION INDICATOR (MALARIA-PI 7): VECTOR CONTROL Houses in areas at risk that received Indoor Residual Spraying Number of houses in areas at risk of malaria transmission that were sprayed with insecticide. RATIONALE In areas of intense malaria transmission, IRS and ITNs are alternative means for malaria vector control. In areas exposed to unstable or epidemic malaria, IRS has some important advantages: it is particularly useful for achieving a rapid reduction in malaria transmission and it can be targeted to the communities at highest risk. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Number of houses in areas at risk of malaria transmission that were sprayed with insecticide for malaria vector control. MEASUREMENT This indicator is derived from data recorded by the malaria control program. Alternative measurement methods: In the absence of records on houses sprayed, IRS service delivery could alternatively be estimated from quantities of insecticide used for IRS, by assuming a specific application rate for each insecticide and an average sprayable area per house, e.g. 250m 2 . Relation between the coverage indicator (PI 6) and the output indicator (PI 7): Although this indicator may seem to be exactly the numerator of the coverage indicator Malaria PI-6, ‘Proportion of houses in areas at risk of malaria transmission that were sprayed with insecticide in the past year’, this is only so in case the number of houses sprayed is cumulated over exactly 12 months without double counting of houses sprayed more than once over the 12 months. (This 12 months threshold for the coverage indicator was chosen because annual spraying is likely to be the minimum frequency effective in significantly reducing malaria transmission.) For Malaria-PI 7, however, more frequent reporting, e.g. every 3-6 months, may be possible and desired. When converting service delivery results into coverage results, care should therefore be taken not to double count the same houses which are continuously kept covered by repeated sprayings. Platform: Records from National Malaria Control Programs Frequency: Every 3-6 months REFERENCES ● Roll Back Malaria. Malaria Indicator Survey (MIS): http://rbm.who.int/merg, section ‘Survey and Indicator Guidance Task Force’
- 63. 63 PREVENTION INDICATOR (MALARIA-PI 8): VECTOR CONTROL Areas with Integrated Vector Management (IVM) activities Number of specific geographical areas (districts, regions, etc.) with integrated vector management (IVM) activities implemented. RATIONALE Vector control has a proven record in the prevention and control of vector-borne disease. IVM is based on the premise that effective control is not the sole preserve of the health sector but requires the collaboration of various public and private agencies and community participation. IVM entails the use of a range of interventions of proven efficacy, sepa- rately or in combination, in order to implement more cost-effective control and reduce reliance on any single interven- tion. This strategy also serves to extend the useful life of insecticides and drugs by reducing the selection pressure for resistance development. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of geographical areas at risk of malaria (district, regions, provinces) that have IVM activities implemented in the past 12 months Denominator: Total number of targeted geographical areas at risk of malaria transmission MEASUREMENT For specifying “malaria risk” and “target areas” see indicator “houses in areas at risk covered with Indoor Residual Spraying (Malaria PI 6). Maps and data on malaria endemic areas – targeted and non-targeted for control – are usually available in vector control offices. Likewise, the main activities in IVM are to be collected from vector control staff through key informant interviews. This information can be validated by reviewing monthly activity records in different geographical areas. IVM activities may include ITNs, IRS, larviciding (for instance in urban areas). Larvivorous fishes, source reduction and others. Non-recommended activities such as space spraying should not be included. Frequency: Annually REFERENCES ● Global Strategic Framework for Integrated Vector Management. World Health Organization. Geneva, 2004
- 64. 64 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex D: Description of Malaria Indicators TREATMENT INDICATOR (MALARIA-TI 1): PROMPT EFFECTIVE ANTI-MALARIAL TREATMENT People with uncomplicated or severe malaria receiving antimalarial treatment Number of people with uncomplicated or severe malaria receiving antimalarial treatment as per national guidelines. RATIONALE (Prompt) treatment with an effective antimalarial drug regimen is a key component of the technical strategy for control and prevention of malaria advocated by RBM. Which drug regimens are effective differs between countries and changes over time, depending on local drug resistance patterns. Therefore it is important to define effective anti- malarial regimens in the local context, which most countries do in national treatment guidelines. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Number of people diagnosed with uncomplicated or severe malaria who are given anti-malarial treatment according to the national malaria treatment policy. MEASUREMENT ‘People diagnosed with malaria’ is to be understood as the total number of episodes of malaria; in case a given person was diagnosed with malaria twice over the evaluation period of the program, this would contribute two episodes that potentially were correctly treated. Diagnosis of uncomplicated or severe malaria can be laboratory-confirmed in countries which routinely perform labo- ratory testing for malaria, or presumptive, based on clinical symptoms (such as in most high-endemic countries in sub-Saharan Africa) where all cases of acute fever without an obvious non-malarial cause are considered malaria). An antimalarial treatment conforming to national treatment guidelines can be artemisin-based combination therapy (ACT) or another, non-artemisinin-based therapy that is recommended in the country. For purposes of analysis and advocacy at the GFATM, however, it is preferable to also report the number of treatments separately for ACT and non-ACT. Platform: Routine health information system or other relevant sources Frequency: Every 3-6 months
- 65. 65 TREATMENT INDICATOR (MALARIA-TI 2): PROMPT EFFECTIVE ANTIMALARIAL TREATMENT Children under five years of age (and other target groups) with fever who are promptly treated with an effective antimalarial Proportion of children under 5 years of age (and other target groups) with fever who received antimalarial treatment according to national policy within 24 hours of onset of fever. RATIONALE The majority of deaths from severe malaria are caused by the lack of or delayed administration of effective anti-malarial treatment. In Africa where the majority of malaria cases and deaths occur in young children who have not yet acquired clinical immunity and where the differential diagnosis of malaria as the cause of acute child fever is problematic, it is recommended that all acute childhood fevers in areas of high malaria endemicity be treated presumptively with an antimalarial. In areas of unstable or highly seasonal falciparum malaria transmission, as in most countries outside sub-Saharan Africa, the lack of frequent exposure to malaria infection early in life delays the acquisition of clinical immunity, and older age groups remain at relatively high risk for malaria when exposed. Prompt access to effective malaria treatment among children with fever in high endemic areas, and other target groups in lower endemic areas is therefore a key component of the technical strategy for control and prevention of malaria advocated by Roll Back Malaria (RBM). DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of children <5 years old (and other target groups) with a fever during the previous two weeks who were treated with a locally effective anti-malarial drug according to the national malaria treat- ment policy, within 24 hours from onset of the fever Denominator: Total number of children <5 years old (and other target groups) with a fever during the previous two weeks Note: Analysis and reporting by province and according to urban/rural setting is recommended. MEASUREMENT In countries where most of the population lives at risk of endemic malaria (such as tropical Africa), surveys measuring this indicator such as DHS and MICS should be used. In countries where only part of the population lives at risk of malaria transmission, surveys must take a representative sample of the entire area at risk and the survey report should clearly describe sampling design and definition of population- at risk used. Alternatively, in such countries, areas without endemic malaria must be identified so that they may be excluded during the analysis when data were collected through nationally representative household surveys. The denominator is measured during the household listing procedure when every child <5 who slept in the house the previous night is identified. The numerator is determined by first asking about whether each child has had a fever in the two weeks preceding the survey then for each child with a fever if (and where) s/he was given an anti-malarial treatment, and finally which specific drug and the timing of treatment relative to the onset of the fever. The definition of ‘effective’ antimalarial depends on the local drug efficacy spectrum, and is operationally defined as all drugs that are included in the national antimalarial drug policy. (In some countries, these may include only artemisinin-based combination therapies; in others, conventional monotherapies such as chloroquine and sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine are also considered effective.) In countries of mostly stable endemic transmission, such as in tropical Africa, a large proportion of child fevers (e.g. 40 percent) are due to malaria, and, in the absence of universal access to laboratory diagnosis, the recommendation is to treat all child fevers presumptively as malaria. In lower-endemic settings, however, fewer child fevers are due to malaria, a larger proportion of malaria episodes occur in older age groups, and fevers in children under-5 are a less ➪
- 66. 66 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex D: Description of Malaria Indicators useful denominator for assessing the coverage of antimalarial treatment. In these settings, surveys ideally inquire about fevers or self-reported episodes of malaria in older age groups as well (see sampling framework of MIS). Here, data about antimalarial usage for fevers are probably more useful as an indication of the demand for antimalarial treat- ments than as an estimate of coverage of antimalarial treatment. Platform: DHS (USAID/MACRO), MICS (UNICEF), MIS, ‘Rider’ on other representative surveys Frequency: Every 2-3 years REFERENCES ● Roll Back Malaria/MEASURE. Guidelines for core indicators for assessing malaria intervention coverage from household surveys. July 2004. rbm.who.int/partnership/wg/wg_monitoring/docs/GuidelinesForCorePopulationFINAL9 ● Roll Back Malaria. Malaria Indicator Survey (MIS): rbm.who.int/merg, section ‘Survey and Indicator Guidance Task Force’ ● UNICEF Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey: www.unicef.org/statistics/index_24302.html ● MEASURE Demographic and Health Surveys: www.measuredhs.com
- 67. 67 TREATMENT INDICATOR (MALARIA-TI 3): PROMPT EFFECTIVE ANTI-MALARIAL TREATMENT Health facilities with no reported stockouts of anti-malarial drugs Percentage of health facilities with no reported stock outs lasting >1 week of nationally recommended anti- malarial drugs at any time during the past three months. RATIONALE The continued supply of anti-malarial drugs is key to the delivery of prompt effective treatment at health facilities. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of health facilities with nationally recommended anti-malarial drugs available on the day of survey and with no stock outs lasting one week or longer at any time in the last three months Denominator: Total number of health facilities surveyed with nationally recommended anti-malarial drugs Note: Analysis and reporting by province according to urban/rural setting is recommended. MEASUREMENT Health facility surveys, with questionnaires administered to the head of each section of sampled facilities. Surveys must be designed to include, for each district of interest, the district hospital and at least two other Health centers/posts serving selected communities within the district. Besides this indicator, such surveys will also provide important data on the appropriateness of management of severe malaria cases, through examination of in-patient records of the District Hospital as well as through direct observation of health care providers at work in patient consultation. Platform: Health Facility Survey Frequency: Annually REFERENCES ● Roll Back Malaria. Framework for Monitoring Progress and Evaluating Outcomes and Impact. 2000. Geneva. rbm.who.int/cmc_upload/0/000/012/168/m_e_en.pdf ● WHO. Roll Back Malaria Initiative in the African Region. Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines. Harare, WHO Regional Office, 2000
- 68. 68 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex D: Description of Malaria Indicators TREATMENT INDICATOR (MALARIA-TI 4): PROMPT EFFECTIVE ANTI-MALARIAL TREATMENT Patients with severe malaria receiving correct treatment Percentage of patients admitted with severe malaria receiving correct treatment at health facilities. RATIONALE Severe malaria usually occurs as a result of a delay in treatment of uncomplicated malaria. Especially in children, progression to severe disease may occur very rapidly. Because of the high case fatality of severe malaria, correct clinical management is key to saving lives. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of patients admitted with severe malaria who are correctly given anti-malarials and supportive treatment according to national malaria treatment policy Denominator: Total number of patients admitted with severe malaria at health facilities MEASUREMENT Data on this indicator are collected through health facility surveys, with questionnaires administered to the head of each section of sampled facilities. Surveys must be designed to include, for each district, the district hospital and at least two other health centers/posts serving selected communities within the district. Besides this indicator, such surveys will also provide important data on the appropriateness of management of severe malaria cases, through examination of records of in-patients in the District Hospital as well as through direct observation of health care providers at work in patient consultation. Platform: 1) Part of routine supervision of NMCP; 2) Health facility survey (Form 7) Frequency: 1) Annually 2) Annually REFERENCES ● Roll Back Malaria. Framework for Monitoring Progress and Evaluating Outcomes and Impact. 2000. Geneva. rbm.who.int/cmc_upload/0/000/012/168/m_e_en.pdf ● WHO. Roll Back Malaria Initiative in the African Region. Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines. Harare, WHO Regional Office, 2000
- 69. 69 TREATMENT INDICATOR (MALARIA-TI 5): HOME BASED MANAGEMENT OF MALARIA Home based management kits distributed Number of kits for home-based management of malaria distributed to households living at risk of malaria. RATIONALE The majority of deaths from malaria are caused by a lack, or delayed administration, of effective anti-malarial treat- ment. In areas of high malaria transmission and poor access to facility-based health care, such as rural Africa, RBM advocates home-based case management of children under 5 years of age as one of the strategies to achieve high coverage of prompt and effective antimalarial treatment. The group of children under-5 is targeted for home-based case management because in this age group progression to severe disease and deaths is particularly fast, and this age group accounts for a large share of overall malaria burden in high-transmission areas. Home-based case management involves educating mothers, training community-level providers – including shopkeepers – and supplying pre-packaged quality-assured medicines. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Number of kits of pre-packaged quality-assured antimalarial medicines distributed to caregivers of children under 5 years in households living in areas at risk of malaria, for the home-based management of malaria in children under 5 years. MEASUREMENT Distributed to households denotes being delivered, by community-level providers, to caregivers of children under 5 years of age (as opposed to being distributed by the malaria control program to community health workers). Platform: Records from National Malaria Control Programs and other relevant sources Frequency: Every 3-6 months
- 70. 70 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex D: Description of Malaria Indicators IMPACT INDICATOR (MALARIA-II 1): DEATH RATES ASSOCIATED WITH MALARIA ■ Stable/highly endemic settings: All-cause under-5 mortality (5 q0 ), expressed as deaths per 1000 under-fives. ■ Settings with lower malaria endemicity or epidemic malaria: Malaria-attributed deaths reported in all age groups. RATIONALE Mortality is a major component of the burden caused by malaria, and halving malaria-related mortality is the overall goal of the Roll Back Malaria initiative. Approaches to measuring malaria-related mortality differ between regions, according to the local endemicity (transmission intensity) of malaria. Areas of stable malaria transmission Most countries of sub-Saharan Africa have areas where malaria transmission occurs at a high level for several months each year; in addition similar areas of stable transmission exist in small focal areas of South-East Asia. In these areas of stable endemicity, the major burden of malaria occurs in very young children who, because they have not yet developed adequate clinical immunity, are at highest risk of severe illness and death. Over 80% of global malaria deaths occur in African children under 5 years of age. Because the symptoms (such as fever) and signs (such as anemia) are not specific and sensitive for malaria, measuring malaria-specific mortality in these settings is difficult. Efforts to assess malaria-attributable mortality using a retro- spective verbal autopsy lack sufficient specificity, especially for young children. Child deaths related to malaria are frequently concurrent with other common illnesses, rather than directly and solely attributable to malaria. Moreover, a majority of deaths do not occur in hospitals and are not recorded in national health information systems (HIS), and these are unlikely to be picked up in vital registration systems. All-cause under-5 mortality, abbreviated as 5 q0 , i.e. the probability that a live-born child dies before his or her fifth birthday, is therefore the preferred mortality indicator, because in these settings, about 18% of under-5 mortality is estimated to be directly attributable to malaria [Rowe et al., 2005], malaria contributes indirectly to many more under-5 deaths, and successful malaria control using ITNs has been demonstrated to considerably reduce all-cause under-5 mortality. For proper interpretation, trends in all-cause under-5 mortality must be analyzed alongside trends in coverage of key malaria interventions (ITN use, prompt effective treatment, and intermittent preventive treatment of pregnant women), which are commonly measured in the same surveys that provide mortality statistics (see below). Areas of unstable, low malaria transmission Residents of areas of low, highly seasonal malaria transmission or areas at risk of malaria epidemics will not have had enough exposure to acquire any significant level of clinical immunity to malaria. In these areas, all age groups are at risk of severe illness and death. In many of these settings, a larger proportion of severe malaria cases presents to health facilities, and malaria-attributed deaths reported in the HIS may provide a reliable indication of malaria-related mortality. Depending on the population’s access to health care and completeness of HIS reporting, reported malaria deaths will reflect the total burden of malaria mortality in the population, or a proportion of that from which at least the time trend in malaria mortality could be inferred. In areas of lower access to health care, or where HIS reporting is inadequate (such as in complex emergencies), estimations of malaria deaths may be obtained through other methods such as community surveys or special surveillance sites. DEFINITION OF INDICATOR – All-cause under-5 mortality (5 q0 ) Numerator: Number of children borne alive who were reported to have died before their fifth birthday Denominator: Total number of children borne alive (as reported in a survey)
- 71. 71 MEASUREMENT In sub-Saharan Africa, where civil death registration is in most countries inadequate, the main source of statistics on all-cause under-5 mortality are representative, population-based surveys. Notably, the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS [ORC Macro]) estimate infant and childhood mortality rates through birth history interviewing of women aged 15-49 years sampled nation-wide through a two-stage cluster design. Besides DHS, UNICEF’s Multiple Cluster Indicator Surveys (MICS) also provide nationally representative mortality estimates, through a non-birth-history surveying tech- nique. These two surveys are carried out in an increasing number of developing countries every 3-5 years. The DHS and MICS data are two of the main sources for the country-by-country under-5 mortality estimation published every year by UNICEF in the State of the World’s Children Report [UNICEF, 2004; Hill et al., 1999]. This estimation also takes into account data from censuses, where available, and for some countries, vital registration and surveys using the preceding birth technique [PBT] [Hill & Aguirre, 1990]. The method to synthesize mortality data has recently been refined such that standard errors can be estimated and the statistical significance of mortality trends can be determined. Platform: DHS (USAID/MACRO), MICS (UNICEF), or other nationally representative surveys Frequency: Every 5 years REFERENCES ● Hill AG, Aguirre A. Childhood mortality estimates using the preceding birth technique: some applications and extensions. Population Studies 1990;44:317–40. ● Hill K, Pande R, Mahy M, Jones G. Trends in child mortality in the developing world: 1960–1996. New York: UNICEF, 1999. ● ORC Macro, MEASURE DHS+. Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS). ORC Macro, Calverton, MD, USA. http://www.measuredhs.com. ● Rowe AK, Rowe SY, Snow RW, et al. For the Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group. Estimates of the burden of mortality directly attributable to malaria for children under 5 years of age in Africa for the year 2000. Final report. 2005. ● The state of the world’s children 2005: childhood under threat. New York, NY, United Nations Children’s Fund, 2004 (http://www.unicef.org/sowc05/english/sowc05.pdf, accessed 25 February 2005). ● Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS-2)/End decade assessment. New York, NY, United Nations Children’s Fund, 2001 (http://www.childinfo.org/MICS2/natlMICSrepz/ MICSnatrep.htm/). ● Roll Back Malaria Monitoring & Evaluation Reference Group (MERG), Survey and Indicator Guidance Task Force. http://rbm.who.int/merg and http://www.rollbackmalaria.org/partnership/wg/wg_monitoring/docs/HHsurvey_schedule. xls.
- 72. 72 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex D: Description of Malaria Indicators IMPACT INDICATOR (MALARIA-II 2): INCIDENCE OF CLINICAL MALARIA CASES Number of clinical (symptomatic) cases of malarial illness, per 1000 person-years. RATIONALE In persons without adequate immunity, malaria infection usually results in clinical illness, the most common symptom being acute fever. The burden of disease directly attributable to malaria is best expressed as the incidence, rather than prevalence, of clinical disease episodes for several reasons: 1) clinical malaria episodes typically last a short period of time measured in days; 2) in areas of stable transmission, most adults and older children may become infected and remain parasitaemic for substantial periods of time without ever developing symptoms or, thus, requiring treatment. The overall occurrence of parasite infection, which is commonly measured as malaria parasite or infection prevalence, is not, then, a good indication of malaria disease burden. The incidence of clinical malaria episodes, which is a more valid measure of disease burden, is usually estimated rather than directly measured. In most high burden areas , the majority of cases of malarial illness are treated outside the formal health care system, and thus cases reported in national health information systems represent only a fraction of the total cases occurring in the population. DEFINITION & MEASUREMENT OF INDICATOR WHO/RBM leads the RBM Monitoring & Evaluation Reference Group (MERG) Task Force on Malaria Morbidity, which has developed an epidemiological model estimating the incidence of clinical malaria episodes. The model is based on national populations living in different categories of malaria transmission risk and intensity (endemicity), which are defined according to the prevalence of parasite infection among children aged 2 to 9 years old (see also description of next indicator: ‘Prevalence of malaria parasite infection’ (MALARIA-II 3)). For each population group of a given endemicity and age, a standardized rate of clinical incidence is applied. Country estimates are further adjusted to account for the local coverage and impact of insecticide treated nets (ITN) and indoor residual spraying (IRS). Resulting estimates can be updated every 3-5 years to reflect the impact of increasing levels of coverage of ITNs and IRS (at country level). An alternative method to estimate the incidence of clinical malaria disease is based on the malaria cases recorded in national health information systems (HIS). In most countries, cases recorded in national HIS represent only a fraction of total malaria cases, due to limited access to health facilities and lack of completeness of HIS reporting (e.g. HIS covers only public facilities and not private facilities, and/or not all health facilities or districts report their malaria cases consistently every month). Cases reported through the HIS must therefore be adjusted for the (local, national) level of completeness of HIS reporting to arrive at a valid estimate of total clinical malaria disease episodes. For some countries, notably most high burden countries in sub-Saharan africa, access to health care and the quality of HIS are so limited that only the first method is recommended. For other countries with better accesss to health care and better HIS reporting, both methods are valuable and they are ideally triangulated to arrive at a final estimate of disease incidence. Frequency: ● Epidemiological estimation: every 3-5 years ● Cases recorded in national HIS: every year, with accompanying assessment of the local completeness of HIS reporting ideally every 1-2 years
- 73. 73 REFERENCES ● Roll Back Malaria Monitoring & Evaluation Reference Group (MERG). http://rbm.who.int/merg . ● Korenromp EL, for the Roll Back Malaria Monitoring and Evaluation Reference Group & MERG Task Force on Malaria Morbidity. Malaria incidence estimates at country level for the year 2004 – proposed estimates and draft report. Geneva, Roll Back Malaria, World Health Organization, March 2005 (http://mosquito.who.int/docs/ incidence_estimations2.pdf). ● Nahlen BL et al. Malaria risk: estimating clinical episodes of malaria. Nature 2005, 434: p. E3. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v437/n7056/pdf/nature04178.pdf . ● Minutes of the first meeting of the MERG Task Force on Malaria Morbidity, October 2004, http://www. rollbackmalaria.org/partnership/wg/wg_monitoring/docs/ MorbidityTaskForce_meetingOct04_2004.pdf
- 74. 74 Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit – Annex D: Description of Malaria Indicators ENDEMICITY INDICATOR (MALARIA-II 3): PREVALENCE OF MALARIA PARASITE INFECTION Prevalence of Plasmodium infection among relevant age groups in the population. RATIONALE The prevalence of Plasmodium infection is not a direct indication of malaria’s disease burden, because parasite infec- tion is frequently asymptomatic, especially in adults in high endemic areas. However, infection prevalence is a useful indicator of the level of malaria endemicity (transmission intensity), which in turn is one of the determinants of disease incidence (see indicator above: Incidence of clinical malaria cases). DEFINITION OF INDICATOR Numerator: Number of persons having a positive blood smear Denominator: Total number of persons tested MEASUREMENT: Representative population-based surveys conducted during or right after the local malaria transmission season. Population groups to be surveyed are, in high endemic areas, children up to age 5 or 9 years, and in lower endemic areas, all age groups. The standard measurement method is microscopy on finger-prick blood samples. The possible use in surveys of Rapid Diagnostic Tests is under investigation. Platform: Malaria Indicator Surveys (MIS) or similar surveys conducted during or right after the local malaria trans- missioin season Frequency: Every 2-3 years REFERENCES ● Roll Back Malaria. Malaria Indicator Survey (MIS): http://rbm.who.int/merg, section ’Survey and Indicator Guidance Task Force’.