Evaluating eye health care services progress towards VISION 2020 goals in Gurage Zone, Ethiopia

Abstract

Abstract Background Ethiopia signed the VISION 2020 Global Declaration and launched its eye health program in 2002. Since then, there has been limited systematic and comprehensive evaluation of the progress towards VISION 2020 goals in Ethiopia. Objective To evaluate Gurage Zone progress towards VISION 2020 targets and process indicators. Method An institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted among all public and private eye health care facilities in the Gurage Zone within the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and People Region of Ethiopia. The evaluation protocol was adopted from the VISION 2020 situational analysis data collection tool. We used this structure to evaluate progress in terms of human resources for eye health, infrastructure, and service delivery at the zonal health office and health facilities. At the time of the study, Gurage Zone had a 1.7 million catchment area population. There were a total of five eye care centers, one of which was established by a non-governmental organization. Three of these facilities were secondary eye care centers with an operating theatre and two facilities were primary eye care centers. At the zonal level, there was no survey data available on the prevalence of blindness. Result There was no systemic evaluation of VISION 2020 process indicators. The budget allocation specific to eye health care was less than 0.7% of the total budget of the zonal health office. The human resources for eye health (HReH) in the catchment area were: one ophthalmologist, two cataract surgeons, five optometrists, and 12 ophthalmic nurses, which is below the VISION 2020 targets for HReH. In terms of equipment, neither primary eye care center had a slit lamp biomicroscope, and two of the three secondary eye care centers did not have intraocular pressure measuring equipment. Only one secondary eye care center was providing glaucoma surgical services, and no center provided emergency and elective pediatric surgery. The cataract surgical rate determined by the study was 1967. Conclusion Gurage Zone showed significant improvement in terms of cataract surgical rate. But it had not achieved VISION 2020 goals in terms of critical HReH and service delivery. We recommend that the zonal health office carries out a focused and baseline evaluation of eye health care service achievements.

Keywords

• Eye health care services
• Progress evaluation
• Gurage Zone
• Vision 2020