Incomplete Reporting of HIV/AIDS by Uganda’s Surveillance System and the Associated Factors

Abstract

Introduction: The United States government supported Ugandan government by introducing the District Health Information Software 2 (DHIS2) in 2012 to improve HIV/AIDS surveillance. Districts have yet to fully adopt this relatively new system given a 70.2% reporting completeness achieved nationally between April-June 2013. Methods: The study examined one dependent variable of districts’ reporting completeness against four independent variables: 1) Number of client visits; 2) Number of district health units; 3) Number of NGOs delivering HIV/AIDS services; and 4) Regional location. The study employed cross-sectional study design which allowed researchers to compare many different variables at the same time. HIV/AIDS program data that were reported by districts into DHIS2 during the period of April to June 2013 were used to assess for reporting completeness. Findings: Districts with the lowest number of client visits (under 2500) achieved the highest mean reporting completeness (81.6%), whereas a range of 2501 - 5000, or over 5001client visits recorded 72.4% and 51.7% respectively. The higher the number of client visits is, the lower the reporting completeness is (p < 0.05). Those districts that were receiving support from only one and two NGO recorded 56.7% and 67.2% respectively. Districts supported by over three NGOs had the highest (80.6%) mean reporting completeness. NGOs-district support was statistically associated with reporting completeness (p < 0.05). The number of health units operated by a district was also significantly associated with reporting completeness (p < 0.05). The regional location of a district was not associated with reporting completeness (p = 0.674). Conclusion: The study results led us to recommend targeted future NGO support to districts with higher patient volume for HIV/AIDS services. Particularly, newly funded NGOs are to be established in districts operating over 40 health units. Incomplete reporting undermines identification of HIV-affected individuals and limits the ability to make evidence-based decisions regarding HIV/AIDS program planning and service delivery.