Priority IPC Indicators

  • Scope: NAP Countries
  • Focus: NTP
  • Objectives:
    • Describe the hierarchy of IPC controls and their respective importance
    • Describe global-level, comparable indicators as examples of measurement opportunities for IPC interventions
  • Expected Outputs/Outcomes: After attending the webinar, participants will be able to
    • Describe some high-level, comparable indicators for measuring IPC interventions in various IPC domains
      • Which of the three is a possible IPC measurement for administrative controls:
        • Percentage of people who are started on effective therapy after a TB diagnosis through a molecular test within one day
        • Percentage of health care workers wearing N95 respirators
        • Percentage of facilities in the country with an up-to-date IPC plan
      • Understand the specific, operationalized measurements of IPC interventions and hear experiences from country teams on how they measure IPC interventions at national and sub-national levels.
        • True or false, all countries can measure every IPC intervention through the same set of indicators?
          • False I would say (i.e. need local context)
        • Detailed Outline:
          • Intro/Measuring IPC Implementation/Purpose:
            • To measure progress toward NAP Milestones 2.2.1 and 2.2.3 in the 10 NAP priority countries
            • To define global comparative indicators to measure IPC implementation
            • To supplement these global indicators with additional, country-specific indicators as requirements and resources allow
            • To document progress toward NAP milestones in a standardized and comparable manner
          • Choosing Universal Indicators:
            • Methods (this is focused on the Manila meeting in August 2018 and subsequent October 2018 meeting in The Hague and the process we followed)
              • Define a detailed framework of IPC indicators
              • Within this framework, assess the current status of measuring IPC interventions in the NAP countries
              • Facilitated through the Global Consultation and Support for IPC Implementation in Manila, Philippines on August 6-7, 2018
              • Compare the county-level frameworks to understand possibilities for comparative indicators
              • Define overall, global/comparative indicators to measure progress toward NAP milestones
              • Supplement these indicators with additional, country-specific indicators as necessary and feasible
            • Present national level M&E Indicator Survey Results (i.e. when we presented the list of every IPC indicator, what countries were already collecting which?)
              • Present this by type of control (i.e. managerial, administrative, environmental, PPE and separately for HCW screening)
            • Present summary results to look at overall quantity of indicators collected on IPC in each of the NAP countries who participated
            • Present the preferred institutional level TB IPC indicators (the ones we discussed in The Hague)
          • Country Example: South Africa
          • Country Example: Ukraine (or another country based on suggestions)
          • Questions
          • Conclusion
  • Click here to join the webinar on August 30, 2019 at 09:00 AM in Eastern Time (US and Canada)

Add to Calendar