I will share death registration and medical certification of cause of death coverage in India-state by state. One tweet per day.
In the absence of reliable cause of death data, how can we effectively plan to reduce cause specific deaths? (1/n) #CRS#MCCD#RoutineDeathSurveillance
In India,
86% of estimated deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
21.1% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Therefore
18.1% (86%*21.1%) of all estimated deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification
(2/n)
In Andhra Pradesh,
100% of estimated deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
14.9% registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Therefore
14.9% (100%*14.9%) of estimated deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification
(3/n)
In Telangana,
58.2% of estimated deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
37.4% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Therefore
21.8% (58.2%*37.4%) of estimated deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification
(4/n)
In Arunachal Pradesh,
47.8% of estimated deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
32.9% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
15.7% (47.8%*32.9%) of estimated deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification
(5/n)
In Assam,
66.9% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
12% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
8% (66.9%*12%) of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification
(6/n)
In Bihar,
34.6% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
13.6% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
4.7% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (34.6%*13.6%=4.7%)
(6/n)
In Chattisgarh,
83.5% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
19.8% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
16.5% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (83.5%*19.8%=16.5%)
(7/n)
In Goa,
All deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification
(8/n)
In Gujarat,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
23.4% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
23.4% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*23.4%=23.4%)
(9/n)
In Haryana,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
20.4% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
20.4% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*20.4%=20.4%)
(10/n)
In Himachal Pradesh,
83.9% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
15% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
12.6% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (83.9%*15%=12.6%)
(11/n)
In Jharkhand,
54.5% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
4.6% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
2.5% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (54.5%*4.6%=2.5%)
(12/n)
In Karnataka,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
31.1% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
31.1% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*31.1%=31.1%)
(13/n)
In Kerala,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
11.9% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
11.9% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*11.9%=11.9%)
(14/n)
In Madhya Pradesh,
78.8% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
10.5% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
8.3% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (78.8%*10.5%=8.3%)
(15/n)
In Maharashtra,
98.4% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
34.8% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
34.2% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (98.4%*34.8%=34.2%)
(16/n)
In Manipur,
37.5% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
51.4% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
19.3% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (37.5%*51.4%=19.3%)
(17/n)
In Meghalaya,
89.7% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
43.1% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
38.7% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (89.7%*43.1%=38.7%)
(18/n)
In Mizoram,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
58.9% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
58.9% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*58.9%=58.9%)
(19/n)
In Nagaland,
9.7% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
28.7% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
2.8% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (9.7%*28.7%=2.8%)
(20/n)
In Odisha,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
11.1% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
11.1% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*11.1%=11.1%)
(21/n)
In Punjab,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
17.1% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
17.1% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*17.1%=17.1%)
(22/n)
In Rajasthan,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
13.1% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
13.1% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*13.1%=13.1%)
(23/n)
In Sikkim,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
42.5% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
42.5% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*42.5%=42.5%)
(24/n)
In Tamil Nadu,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
45% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
45% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*45%=45%)
(25/n)
In Tripura,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
22.3% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
22.3% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*22.3%=22.3%)
(26/n)
In Uttarakhand,
70.7% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
11.1% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
7.8% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (70.7%*11.1%=7.8%)
(27/n)
In Uttar Pradesh,
60.8% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
5.1% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
3.1% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (60.8%*5.1%=3.1%)
(28/n)
In West Bengal,
91.8% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
12.9% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
11.8% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (91.8%*12.9%=11.8%)
(29/n)
In Andaman & Nicobar,
72.9% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
59.5% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
43.4% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (72.9%*59.5%=43.4%)
(30/n)
In Chandigarh,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
71.8% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
71.8% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*71.8%=71.8%)
(31/n)
In Delhi,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
62.3% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
62.3% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*62.3%=62.3%)
(32/n)
In Puducherry,
100% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
74% of registered deaths undergo cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence,
74% of deaths undergo registration along with cause of death certification (100%*74%=74%)
(33/n)
In JnK and Ladakh,
63.3% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
N/A - % of registered deaths undergoing cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
(34/n)
In Dadra Nagar Haveli, Daman & Diu
85.7% of deaths are registered (CRS report 2018)
100% of registered deaths undergoing cause of death certification (MCCD report 2018)
Hence, 85.7% of deaths are registered along with a cause of death certification
(35/35)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🧵
Control TB? End TB ? Eliminate TB ? I often find the phrases being used interchangeably. What is the right terminology to use in what context? A short thread on this topic
By 2015 (reference 1990), the MDG goals for TB were achieved - to stop increase in incidence and halve the mortality. The goal was reached globally and in 16 of the 22 high-burden countries that collectively account for 80% of cases. Then came SDGs
Globally,
The SDG 2030 TB targets (reference 2015) are to reduce TB incidence by 80%, TB deaths by 90% and achieve zero catastrophic costs incurred by patients.
The SDG 2030 TB targets are the same as WHO 2030 End TB targets.
1/15
Screening People with Tuberculosis for High Risk of Severe Illness at Notification: Programmatic Experience from Karnataka, India mdpi.com/1151162 in journal #TMID via @MDPIOpenAccess
“Don’t criticze. Spread positivity. See how you can help others”
This statement is made with the assumption that people who criticise Governments are not helping others and people who post messages like “spread positivity” are helping others.
..
Let us learn to call a spade a spade and not get stuck in this propaganda of “spreading positivity”.
The central Govt has bungled up COVID19 vaccination despite us having the vaccines (large chunk exported) and technical expertise of running vaccination campaigns.
..
If we had planned and stocked only 44 crore doses, we would have by Feb-Mar fully vaccinated >45y with two doses through our decentralised public health vaccination system. It would have prevented a catastrophe.
The current COVID19 pandemic in India has exposed the fact that medical and public health experts within the system do not #TakeAStand.
1/4
I am talking about basic stuff like
- Data transparency - eg interpreting low deaths in India based on low reported COVID19 deaths. Govt continue to boast about this.
2/4
I am talking about basic stuff like
- Wrong COVID Vaccination Strategy - we did not plan, stock and use the correct strategy for vaccination. We continue to use CoWin and have opened to all despite no vaccines
3/4
2/n
Therefore with these levels of LOW coverage, we cannot expect any dent in the hospitalisations and deaths
We missed a window of opportunity during Feb/Mar
3/n Had we at least achieved 89-90% of 1st dose coverage along >45, we could have expected significant impact on hospitalisations and deaths. We could have done this through campaign mode vaccination using our public health vaccination system through apriori microplanning.
All India had to do in Feb/Mar 2021 was complete both doses for >45 y in campaign mode (at least in elderly, at least in high burden districts)
That required planning in advance, procuring 40 crore doses and distributing to the states
The states distribute it to districts and PHCs based on the estimated requirement in microplans.
Vaccination should have been done using our pubic health vacc system that is decentralised upto the Anganwadi through bottom up micro-planning
We are spreading out thin without adequate coverage in vulnerable. This will not dent cases and hospitalisation. the limited coverage also appears inequitable