Injection Use and Practices in Uganda - EDM Research Series No. 014
(1994; 54 pages) Ver el documento en el formato PDF
Índice de contenido
Ver el documentoACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Abrir esta carpeta y ver su contenido1. INTRODUCTION
Abrir esta carpeta y ver su contenido2. METHODOLOGY
Cerrar esta carpeta3. EXTENT OF INJECTION USE
Ver el documento3.1 Prevalence of injection use
Ver el documento3.2 Prevalence of specific types of injections
Abrir esta carpeta y ver su contenido3.3 Sources of injections
Ver el documento3.4 Prevalence of injections at various medical facilities
Ver el documento3.5 Evaluation of the appropriateness of injection use
Abrir esta carpeta y ver su contenido4. HYGIENE OF INJECTION PRACTICE
Ver el documento5. POPULARITY OF INJECTIONS
Abrir esta carpeta y ver su contenido6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Ver el documentoREFERENCES
Abrir esta carpeta y ver su contenidoLIST OF APPENDICES
Ver el documentoOTHER DOCUMENTS IN THE DAP RESEARCH SERIES
 

3.1 Prevalence of injection use

In almost all households visited in both regions, a history of injection use could be recorded. In Busoga 359 and in Ankole 358 of the 360 households visited in each region had ever received an injection. Injection prevalence during the past two weeks was recorded twice. During the first visit the households’ respondents were asked who in the household had last received an injection and when. If this was within the past two weeks the data was used to analyze the prevalence rate. The second follow-up visit was planned two weeks after the first. Respondents were asked if any member of the household had received an injection in this confined two week recall period. The figures for the initial visit - last time when an injection was given - indicate that 154 (42.8%) of 360 households in Busoga and 113 (31.4%) of 360 households in Ankole received an injection during the ‘last’ two weeks. In the confined two weeks recall period, one or more people in 93 (25.3%) households in Busoga and 108 (30%) households in Ankole received an injection (see Table 3), The figures show that the rates of injection use prevalence for both recordings differ; especially in Busoga, the two week recall period indicates lower rates, and presumably provides more valid rates.

Table 3: Percentage of households in which one or more injections were given in the past two weeks in Busoga and Ankole Regions

 

Busoga
(Eastern Uganda) n=360

Ankole
(Western Uganda) n=360

Initial visit
(using last two week period)

42.8%
(154)

31.4%
(113)

Follow-up visit after two weeks
(confined two week recall)

25.3%
(93)

30.0%
(108)

Overall the results reveal a high rate of injection use prevalence and also show that the use of injections is highest in the semi-rural and urban areas and lowest in the remote areas (see Table 4).

Table 4: Percentage of households in which one or more infections were given in the last two weeks in urban, semi-rural and remote settings in Busoga and Ankole Regions

 

Busoga
(Eastern Uganda) n=360

Ankole
(Western Uganda) n=360

Urban
n=120

49.2%
(59)

34.2%
(41)

Semi-rural
n=120

50.8%
(61)

36.7%
(44)

Remote
n=120

28.3%
(34)

23.3%
(28)

Ir a la sección anterior
Ir a la siguiente sección
 
 
El Portal de Información - Medicamentos Esenciales y Productos de Salud de la OMS fue diseñado y es mantenido por la ONG Human Info. Última actualización: le 1 diciembre 2019