Health White Paper 2012

www.praja.org

1

Report on the STATE of HEALTH of MUMBAI

WHITE PAPER

Report on

The STATE of HEALTH of MUMBAI

Supported by

FORD FOUNDATION

MADHU MEHTA FOUNDATION

www.praja.org

2


Table of Content

Sr. No. Title

Page

No.

I Foreword 4

II Information on organisations Involved 6

III Note by Healis Sekhsaria Institute for Public Health 7

IV Section A: Compressive of State of Health of Mumbai 8

V Section B: Data collected from Municipal Dispensaries, Municipal Hospitals and State

Hospitals

16

VI Section C: Questions asked by Municipal Councillors and MLAs 23

Tables

1 Estimated percentage of Annual Family Income spent on hospital/medical costs 9

2 Whether Respondents has Medical Insurance 9

3 Estimated Citizens using Government Dispensaries/Hospital 9

4 Estimated Occurrence of Diseases/Ailments for the year 2011-12 10

5 Ward wise Malaria as per survey 11

6 Ward wise Hypertension as per survey 12

7 Ward wise Tuberculosis as per survey 13

8 Ward wise Diabetes as per survey 14

9 MLA constituency wise survey 15

10 Sensitive Diseases/Ailments as per RTI Data 17

11 Ward wise registered cases of Malaria (April 2008 to March 2012) as per RTI data 18

12 Ward wise registered cases of Diarrhoea (April 2008 to March 2012) as per RTI

data

19

13 Ward wise registered cases of Hypertension (April 2008 to March 2012) as per RTI

data

20

www.praja.org

3


14 Ward wise registered cases of Tuberculosis (April 2008 to March 2012) as per RTI

data

21

15 Ward wise registered cases of Diabetes (April 2008 to March 2012) as per RTI data 22

16 Questions asked on health by councillors (March 2012 to May 2012) 24

17 Issues raised/Questions asked by Councillors 25

18 Questions asked on health by MLAs during following sessions: Budget 2010,

Monsoon 2010, Winter 2010, Budget 2011, Monsoon 2011 and Winter 2011

26

19 Issues raised/Questions asked by MLAs 27

www.praja.org

4


I. Foreword

Is Mumbai prepared to tackle its woes in health management? Our report on the state of health of Mumbai

raises several red flags. While the city’s health is a BMC concern, public health issues involve the state and the

centre as well. It calls for some policy level changes and a deep introspection by all the custodians of public

health.

The Declaration of Alma-Ata in 1978, adopted at the International Conference on Primary Health Care, and

accepted by all member countries of the World Health Organization (WHO) expressed the need for urgent action

by all governments, all health and development workers, and the world community to protect and promote

the health of all people. "Health For All" was the goal set up at this Conference.

Three decades later, we still have almost 25% of city’s population suffering from either malaria, TB, diarrhoea,

diabetes or hypertension. For a city of over 10 million populations, this is a cause for serious concern. 80% of

the city’s population is not insured at all. Less than 25% of Mumbai’s population visit municipal hospitals and

dispensaries.

To put things in perspective, the new agenda for Public Health in India includes the epidemiological transition

(rising burden of chronic non-communicable diseases), demographic transition (increasing elderly population)

and environmental changes. The causes of health inequalities lie in the social, economic and political

mechanisms that lead to social stratification according to income, education, occupation, gender and race or

ethnicity. Lack of adequate progress on these underlying social determinants of health has been acknowledged

as a glaring failure of public health.

There indeed is an urgent call for revitalizing primary health care based on the principles outlined at Alma-Ata in

1978: Universal access and coverage, equity, community participation in defining and implementing health

agendas and inter-sectoral approaches to health. These principles remain valid, but must be reinterpreted in

light of the dramatic changes in the health field during the past 30 years.

The state of health of Mumbai during the last three years has raised several red flags. From 2008-09 (taken as

base year with 100 as a denominator), the incidence of sensitive diseases in the city within the past 4 years has

almost doubled in some of the diseases.

• Malaria has gone up to 171

• Diarrhoea to 123

• Dengue to 276

• Cholera to 185

• Hypertension to 90

• TB to 95

• Diabetes to 89

• Typhoid to 91

• Hepatitis B to 94

And these figures are after the slight improvement in 2011-12 from previous year that had shown exceptional

hike in almost all diseases, not just in Mumbai but across the country. So while BMC needs to be commended in

curtailing the growth rate of diseases from last year, it clearly is not enough. Identification of health objectives

www.praja.org

5


and targets is one of the more visible strategies to direct the activities of the health sector. For instance, in the

United States, the “Healthy People 2010” offered a simple but powerful idea by providing health objectives in a

format that enables diverse groups to combine their efforts and work as a team.

Similarly, in India, we need a road map to “better health for all” that can be used by states, communities,

professional organizations and all sectors. It will also facilitate changes in resource allocation for public health

interventions and a platform for concerted inter-sectoral action, thereby enabling policy coherence. Mumbai

has perhaps the greatest allocation of funds and resources for its health agenda. Can we seriously consider some

policy level amendments and at least attempt to make Mumbai a role model for public health issues all across

India?

NITAI MEHTA

Managing Trustee, Praja Foundation

www.praja.org

6


II. Information on organisations Involved

Praja Foundation:

Founded in 1998, the PRAJA Foundation is a non-partisan voluntary organization which empowers the citizen to

participate in governance by providing knowledge and perspective. PRAJA aims to provide ways in which the

citizen can get politically active and involved beyond the ballot box, thus promoting transparency and

accountability.

PRAJA's goals are: empowering the citizens, elected representatives & government with facts and creating

instruments of change to improve the quality of life of the citizens of India. PRAJA is committed to creating a

transparent, accountable and efficient society through people's participation.

Healis -Sekhsaria Institute for Public Health (Healis):

Founded in 2004, registered under Section 25 of the Indian Companies Act, 1956 on April 29, 2005 and thus

became a separate legal entity as a Not for Profit Organization. Healis primarily works towards advancing public

health through innovative science and evidence-based policy by conduct quality research in public health and

carry forward its outcome for the benefit of the society. Healis is committed to improving the public health in

India and in other developing countries through epidemiological research. Healis is one of the few institutes that

are solely dedicated to public health research and thus a leader in this field in India. Healis works in

collaboration with leading National and International Health and Research organizations.

Hansa Research:

Hansa Research is a full service global market research agency conducting market research in 77 countries

globally with offices in India and US. It is the ONLY global market research agency headquartered in India. Under

the leadership of Mr. Ashok Das, Managing Director, Hansa Research became one of the fastest growing market

research agencies in India. It specializes in Media, Telecom, Financial Services, Consumer Products and

Technology spaces. With research offices across India and the U.S., Hansa Research’s infrastructure is

comparable to the best in the industry.

Hansa Research also has considerable experience in the space of opinion polls as it has done several studies

dealing with social, cultural and political issues in the country.

www.praja.org

7


III. Note by Healis Sekhsaria Institute for Public Health

The principles enshrined in our Constitution, particularly in the Directives, emphasise the role of the state not

only for protecting the health and but also for improving the health of its citizens.

“Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health.

The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the

improvement of public health as among its primary duties........”

from Part IV of Indian Constitution, Directive Principles of State Policy

Since independence, subsequent national, state and local governments have hence taken up several initiatives

to control/eradicate diseases, improve environmental sanitation, raise the standard of nutrition, control

population and improve public health. However, public health in India is beset by a vast spectrum of problems.

It is important for us to identify big problems and focus upon them. It is to be understood that a solution to a big

problem will help in improving public health in substantive manner. For public health field research, problems

that can be addressed by population-based epidemiological research have to be selected. Solutions have to be

found to a problem function through evidence-base for formulating policies that should advance public health.

Surveillance systems (health information system) play and extremely important role here; they can provide

accurate understanding of the problem. Hence, setting up strong surveillance system should be priority of the

administrator and the data process for capturing should be scientific, up-to-date and sacrosanct. Equally

importantly, the data captured should be disseminated at all levels to all stakeholders periodically and

suggestions should be actively sought through a more institutionalised manner from all (within the

administration and also from the civil society researchers).

The primary objective of any robust health information system should be to provide reliable, relevant, up-to-

date, adequate, timely and reasonably complete information for health managers at all levels (Local, State and

Central) and to researchers (NGOS, Media and Academicians) to assist planners/researchers for monitoring the

health services/state, analysing trends and making policies.

Even the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), place health at the heart of development; three of the eight

goals are directly related to health and the others have important indirect effects on health. Hence, the data

that is captured locally must be synthesised with global data for overall evaluation of evidence and for drawing

attention towards important but neglected issues. This will further strengthen the health information system.

The immediate need of the hour for our country today is to have such a robust, up-to-date health information

system that will further complement and assist in achieving the goals of all our present and proposed

programmes on improving public health. And no part of our country is better poised to build a more perfect

health information system than Mumbai; with all our administrative resources (local, state and national) and

strong presence of civil society including businesses and range of private organisations. Mumbai can really take

the lead here and then the system can be taken to other parts of the country thus making strides in the direction

of achieving those State Directives enshrined in our Constitution on improving public health.

www.praja.org

8


Dr. MANGESH PEDNEKAR, Director (Research & Development), Healis

IV. Section A: Compressive of State of Health of Mumbai

Praja Foundation had commissioned the household survey to Hansa Research and the survey methodology

followed is as below:

• In order to meet the desired objectives of the study, we represented the city by covering a sample from

each of its 227 wards. Target Group for the study was :

� Both Males & Females

� 18 years and above

� Belonging to that particular ward.

• Sample quotas were set for representing gender and age groups on the basis of their split available through

Indian Readership Study (Large scale baseline study conducted nationally by Media Research Users Council

(MRUC) &Hansa Research group) for Mumbai Municipal Corporation Region.

• The required information was collected through face to face interviews with the help of structured

questionnaire.

• In order to meet the respondent within a ward, following sampling process was followed:

� 4 – 5 prominent areas in the ward were identified as the starting point

� In each starting point about 12 – 15 individuals were selected randomly and the questionnaire was

administered with them.

• Once the survey was completed, sample composition of age & gender was corrected to match the

population profile using the baseline data from IRS. This helped us to make the survey findings more

representatives in nature and ensured complete coverage.

• The total study sample was 15,191.

www.praja.org

9


Table 1: Estimated1 percentage of Annual Family Income spent on hospital/medical costs

In % Amount spent from total income (in %) Estimated Household2

4.26 More than 30% 1,13,171

7.15 21% to 30 % 1,89,946

18.97 11% to 20% 5,03,955

38.92 6% to 10% 10,33,944

30.7 Less than 5% 8,15,572

100 Total 26,56,588

More than 30% of households spend 11% or more of their annual income on hospital/medical costs.

Table 2: Whether Respondents has Medical Insurance

In % In no. of respondents

Respondents have medical insurance 20.45 3,107

Respondents not having medical insurance 79.55 12,084

Total 100 15,191

Table 3: Estimated Citizens using Government Dispensaries/Hospital

Ward Provisional

Population 2011

Estimated citizens

using Govt.

Dispensary/Hospital

(in %)

Estimated citizens

using Govt.

Dispensary/Hospital

(in numbers)

No. of

Municipal/State

Hospitals

Available No.

of Municipal

Dispensaries

Total 1,24,32,830 24.49 30,44,800 28 160

Less than 25% of citizens in Mumbai use government dispensary/hospital; while the rest use private

facilities.

1The estimated cases percentage of people is computed out of the total sample of 15,191 households surveyed across the

city. 2Household computed at the rate of 4.68 people per household based on Provisional Population for 2011

www.praja.org

10


Table 4: Estimated Occurrence of Diseases/Ailments for the year 2011-12

Diseases/Ailments Total Estimated

Cases

Estimated Cases Per 1000

households

Diabetes 274,957 104

Malaria 392,378 148

Tuberculosis 63,227 24

Hypertension 78,635 30

Cancer 39,583 15

In 2011-12, for every 1000 households there was atleast one malaria patient was reported in 148

households.

www.praja.org

11


Table 5: Ward wise Malaria as per survey

Ward Provisional Population

2011

Estimated3 Cases

Estimated cases per

1000 households

2011-124 2011-12

A 148,432 4,710 149

B 127,005 11,593 427

C 165,583 3,768 107

D 346,719 8,809 119

E 413,662 27,675 313

F/N 528,767 16,507 146

F/S 359,980 8,861 115

G/N 602,328 17,310 135

G/S 414,038 21,879 247

H/E 555,179 18,945 160

H/W 329,952 18,380 261

K/E 817,684 29,283 168

K/W 718,375 18,773 122

L 891,208 29,307 154

M/E 806,433 22,435 130

M/W 412,163 8,640 98

N 622,594 19,104 144

P/N 943,605 16,574 82

P/S 461,304 16,776 170

R/C 431,791 15,823 172

R/N 561,870 11,213 93

R/S 690,128 11,355 77

S 742,053 20,692 131

T 341,977 3,749 51

B, E & H/W ward have highest number of people suffering from Malaria. In B ward, 427 out of every

1000 households had some person suffering from Malaria.

3 Estimated cases covers occurrences for the entire ward including cases diagnosed in public as well as private facilities.

4 All the years (E.g. 2008-09) in this paper are financial years (E. g. April 08 to March 09).

www.praja.org

12


Table 6: Ward wise Hypertension as per survey


2011

Estimated Cases Estimated cases per

1000 households

2011-12 2011-12

A 148,432 1,085 34

B 127,005 2,442 90

C 165,583 1,995 56

D 346,719 1,497 20

E 413,662 4,835 55

F/N 528,767 4,429 39

F/S 359,980 2,123 28

G/N 602,328 2,574 20

G/S 414,038 3,831 43

H/E 555,179 5,255 44

H/W 329,952 2,270 32

K/E 817,684 8,876 51

K/W 718,375 3,423 22

L 891,208 4,323 23

M/E 806,433 3,739 22

M/W 412,163 881 10

N 622,594 5,002 38

P/N 943,605 3,085 15

P/S 461,304 2,366 24

R/C 431,791 1,624 18

R/N 561,870 4,130 34

R/S 690,128 1,076 7

S 742,053 4,947 31

T 341,977 848 12

B, C & E ward have highest number of people suffering from Hypertension. In B ward, 90 out of 1000

households had some person suffering from Hypertension.

www.praja.org

13


Table 7: Ward wise Tuberculosis as per survey


2011


1000 households

2011-12 2011-12

A 148,432 257 8

B 127,005 2,963 109

C 165,583 513 15

D 346,719 556 8

E 413,662 6,921 78

F/N 528,767 2,508 22

F/S 359,980 2,146 28

G/N 602,328 3,771 29

G/S 414,038 2,796 32

H/E 555,179 1,578 13

H/W 329,952 2,891 41

K/E 817,684 4,665 27

K/W 718,375 1,857 12

L 891,208 3,790 20

M/E 806,433 7,358 43

M/W 412,163 2,413 27

N 622,594 2,142 16

P/N 943,605 1,794 9

P/S 461,304 1,232 13

R/C 431,791 397 4

R/N 561,870 924 8

R/S 690,128 767 5

S 742,053 6,168 39

T 341,977 1,330 18

B, E & M/E ward have highest number of people suffering from Tuberculosis. In B ward, 109 out of

1000 households had some person suffering from TB.

www.praja.org

14


Table 8: Ward wise Diabetes as per survey


2011


1000 households

2011-12 2011-12

A 148,432 4,421 139

B 127,005 1,180 44

C 165,583 2,993 85

D 346,719 6,423 87

E 413,662 12,516 142

F/N 528,767 12,112 107

F/S 359,980 6,538 85

G/N 602,328 9,640 75

G/S 414,038 7,060 80

H/E 555,179 20,214 170

H/W 329,952 10,237 145

K/E 817,684 18,241 104

K/W 718,375 14,721 96

L 891,208 24,375 128

M/E 806,433 19,833 115

M/W 412,163 7,539 86

N 622,594 15,139 114

P/N 943,605 19,820 98

P/S 461,304 5,076 52

R/C 431,791 9,291 101

R/N 561,870 11,550 96

R/S 690,128 10,927 74

S 742,053 19,281 122

T 341,977 4,815 66

H/E, H/W & E ward have highest number of people suffering from Diabetes. In H/E ward, 170 out of

1000 households had some person suffering from Diabetes.

www.praja.org

15


Table 9: MLA constituency wise survey5

MLA Name Area

Malaria6

(in %)

Hypertension

(in %)

Tuberculosis

(in %)

Diabetes

(in %)

Gopal Shetty Borivali 11.3 0.1 0.2 8.8

VinodGhosalkar Dahisar 9.3 3.4 0.8 9.6

Pravin Darekar Magathane 25.7 4.2 0.8 12.0

Sardar Tara Singh MulundAmboli 5.1 1.2 1.8 6.6

Mangesh Sangle Vikhroli 18.2 6.0 3.5 13.1

Shishir Shinde Bhandup West 13.1 3.1 3.9 12.2

Ravindra Waikar Jogeshwari East 1.5 6.8 0.6 10.6

Rajhans Singh Dindoshi 1.5 6.8 0.6 10.6

Ramesh Singh Thakur Kandivali East 7.4 1.1 1.1 9.1

YogeshSagar Charkop 8.0 0.4 0.0 6.0

AslamShaikh Malad West 8.2 1.5 0.9 9.8

Subhash Desai Goregaon 17.0 2.4 1.3 5.2

Baldev Khosa Versova 8.7 2.8 1.0 13.1

Ashok Jadhav Andheri West 13.3 2.1 1.3 8.6

Suresh Shetty Andheri East 21.0 5.0 3.1 11.2

Krishnakumar Hegde Vile Parle 17.6 3.9 0.4 22.1

Arif Naseem Khan Chadivali 16.9 3.7 3.3 7.6

Ramchandra Kadam Ghatkopar West 13.0 2.4 1.8 9.2

Prakash Maheta Ghatkopar East 14.2 4.3 0.7 13.0

Abu Asim Azmi Mankhurd 9.8 1.0 2.7 8.6

Nawab Malik Anushakti Nagar 13.0 2.2 4.3 11.5

Chandrakant Handore Chembur 9.8 1.0 2.7 8.6

Milind Kamble Kurla (SC) 15.4 2.3 2.0 12.8

Kripashankar Singh Kalina 15.1 4.7 1.9 14.2

Prakash Sawant Vandre East 26.1 3.2 4.1 14.5

Ziyauddin Sidikki Vandre West 26.1 3.2 4.1 14.5

Varsha Gaikwad Dharavi (SC) 9.7 2.5 1.6 3.1

Jagannath Shetty SionKoliwada 19.9 2.7 1.1 9.7

Kalidas Kolambkar Wadala 11.0 4.8 3.0 11.4

Nitin Sardesai Mahim 15.8 1.7 3.8 10.2

Sachin Ahir Worli 24.7 4.3 3.2 8.0

Bala Nandgaonkar Shivadi 11.5 2.8 2.8 8.5

Madhukar Chavan Byculla 34.1 6.3 8.6 11.8

Mangal Prabhat Lodha Malbar Hill 11.9 2.0 0.8 8.7

Amin Amir Ali Patel Mumbadevi 10.7 5.6 1.5 8.5

Annie Shekhar Colaba 14.9 3.4 0.8 13.9

5As per the survey data, Byculla is the worst assembly constituency, followed by Vandre East and Vandre

West; while Byculla is worst for Malaria cases. 6The estimated cases percentage of households suffering from the disease/ailment out of the total sample of 15,191

households surveyed across the city.

www.praja.org

16


V. Section B: Data collected from Municipal Dispensaries, Municipal Hospitals and

State Hospitals

The data that is compiled and presented in this section is collected through RTI from all the (160) municipal

dispensaries, (24) municipal hospitals and (4) state hospitals in Mumbai. Praja since 2008 has been meticulously

collecting this data, collating it and presenting it through media and also directly to all the stakeholders in

improving public health in the city.

The last year white paper released about the same time in 2011, emphasised a lot on the increasing trends in

occurrences of diseases/ailments, particularly, malaria. The public health department officials through various

programmes national and local vector control programmes particularly the ‘Fight the bite’ campaign acted

promptly and the data this year shows a vast reduction in malaria cases. It is very important that such strong

programmes and focussed campaigns be carried out in anticipation of any epidemic breaking out; thus

improving the overall public health in the city. Kudos to the MCGM (Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai)

and its officials for getting it right. We believe that these efforts need to be continued and strengthened further

for improving the public health in the city.

Table 10: Sensitive Diseases/Ailments as per RTI

Malaria

Diarrhoea

Hypertension

Tuberculosis

Diabetes

Typhoid

Hepatitis B

Dengue

Cholera

Inference:

% Increase from 2008

Malaria

Diarrhoea

Hypertension

Tuberculosis

Diabetes

Typhoid

Hepatitis B

Dengue

Cholera

7Data as per RTI received from 160 Municipal Dispensaries, 24 Municipal Hospitals and 4 State Hospitals.

8 Year 2008-09 has been taken as the base year for computing trends for occurrences of cases for the subsequent years.

17

Report on the STATE of

: Sensitive Diseases/Ailments as per RTI7 Data

Sensitive Diseases/Ailments

2008-09 2009-10 2010-

23,317 39,898 78,448

81,321 116,295 125,999

28,337 32,469 38,388

31,510 29,692 32,383

23,777 23,838 22,493

8,288 4,220 6,557

990 444 547

682 866 1,403

96 124 236

% Increase from 2008-09 as base year8 for total cases

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

100 171 336

100 143 155

100 115 135

100 94 103

100 100 95

100 51 79

100 45 55

100 127 206

100 129 246

Data as per RTI received from 160 Municipal Dispensaries, 24 Municipal Hospitals and 4 State Hospitals.

09 has been taken as the base year for computing trends for occurrences of cases for the subsequent years.

www.praja.org

STATE of HEALTH of MUMBAI

-11 2011-12

78,448 39,828

125,999 99,839

38,388 25,518

32,383 29,878

22,493 21,264

6,557 7,561

547 931

1,403 1,879

236 178

11 2011-12

336 171

155 123

135 90

103 95

89

91

94

206 276

246 185

Data as per RTI received from 160 Municipal Dispensaries, 24 Municipal Hospitals and 4 State Hospitals.

09 has been taken as the base year for computing trends for occurrences of cases for the subsequent years.

www.praja.org

18


Table 11: Ward wise9 registered cases of Malaria (April 2008 to March 2012) as per RTI data

Ward Number of cases registered as per RTI data

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

A 133 664 1,221 1,141

B 274 552 1,147 381

C 238 426 1,532 330

D 940 1,645 1,774 277

E 750 756 2,945 1,255

F/N 362 1,365 2,073 1,154

F/S 1,644 2,991 4,499 1,691

G/N 490 1,075 2,088 985

G/S 711 2,149 3,115 1,400

H/E 124 442 804 383

H/W 1,062 817 3,360 595

K/E 747 1,299 3,687 1,610

K/W 652 1,100 2,524 1,080

L 376 832 1,718 751

M/E 536 661 192 1,761

M/W 244 291 622 346

N 244 880 1,909 620

P/N 67 220 385 396

P/S 92 150 251 242

R/C 61 129 334 289

R/N 12 79 83 114

R/S 101 170 417 214

S 99 677 1,083 328

T 45 497 242 178

9 Data of cases registered is only from the related municipal dispensaries in the particular wards. Data from municipal/state

hospital is not taken into account for computing cases for the ward level data.

www.praja.org

19


Table 12: Ward wise10

registered cases of Diarrhoea (April 2008 to March 2012) as per RTI data


2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

A 1,213 1,440 1,522 2,051

B 1,220 1,654 1,844 1,557

C 944 1,309 2,019 2,203

D 1,175 3,579 4,536 5,114

E 5,490 8,147 8,201 4,605

F/N 4,063 5,796 5,295 2,994

F/S 4,424 5,824 7,261 4,753

G/N 3,431 4,343 5,849 4,464

G/S 6,874 6,776 7,252 4,864

H/E 3,442 5,697 6,041 3,949

H/W 2,657 3,338 3,946 2,567

K/E 5,997 7,219 7,885 7,066

K/W 3,358 4,042 4,023 3,354

L 5,379 11,971 12,588 10,592

M/E 1,461 3,769 6,108 4,433

M/W 3,715 4,763 5,083 3,384

N 3,381 6,636 7,869 6,321

P/N 2,104 2,861 2,741 3,373

P/S 804 1,423 1,062 860

R/C 2,922 2,686 1,801 1,850

R/N 1,011 1,067 946 698

R/S 2,920 3,972 2,657 1,569

S 2,950 4,445 5,242 3,686

T 1,387 1,620 1,976 1,845

10

1) Data of cases registered is only from the related municipal dispensaries in the particular wards. Data from

municipal/state hospital is not taken into account for computing cases for the ward level data.

2) Estimated cases for Diarrhoea are not computed as our survey was structured to capture data of atleast one occurrence

of a disease in a household. And, in case of diseases like diarrhoea, cold, cough there is high probability of multiple

occurrences in any household. Hence it would be difficult to estimate an ‘accurate’ number of probable cases for diarrhoea.

www.praja.org

20



registered cases of Hypertension (April 2008 to March 2012) as per RTI data


2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

A 2,562 1,369 1,338 1,076

B 436 750 1,353 913

C 641 653 599 381

D 532 949 686 225

E 866 1,213 1,154 1,270

F/N 575 972 1,234 407

F/S 2,649 3,868 3,586 1,305

G/N 341 548 746 548

G/S 1,681 3,241 2,198 1,970

H/E 443 625 844 1,004

H/W 639 306 496 456

K/E 1,319 1,715 2,241 1,592

K/W 693 - 174 1,122

L 251 502 580 644

M/E 379 142 392 563

M/W 321 529 709 611

N 50 41 24 132

P/N 405 172 282 254

P/S 49 132 155 100

R/C 915 839 890 992

R/N 62 94 249 297

R/S 679 184 201 287

S 75 214 308 316

T 75 160 176 370

11

Data of cases registered is only from the related municipal dispensaries in the particular wards. Data from


www.praja.org

21



registered cases of Tuberculosis (April 2008 to March 2012) as per RTI data


2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

A 292 438 461 348

B 100 155 160 130

C 156 133 131 106

D 378 265 246 259

E 592 516 417 704

F/N 858 1,274 1,332 1,581

F/S 577 573 600 116

G/N 714 404 417 561

G/S 276 221 361 235

H/E 444 503 518 594

H/W 275 250 226 365

K/E 2,048 1,391 1,164 1,703

K/W 395 260 240 360

L 760 1,118 1,118 1,037

M/E 146 67 147 152

M/W 181 200 218 166

N 120 96 65 133

P/N 187 124 96 135

P/S 71 65 69 31

R/C 129 111 137 167

R/N 123 128 86 281

R/S 542 765 572 472

S 417 671 1,551 315

T 334 393 191 236

12



www.praja.org

22



registered cases of Diabetes (April 2008 to March 2012) as per RTI data


2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

A 39 28 46 191

B 189 165 464 818

C 89 66 29 47

D 2 - - 80

E 156 80 212 669

F/N 292 878 938 136

F/S 10 80 24 81

G/N 16 73 105 18

G/S 131 291 492 625

H/E 65 68 71 63

H/W 142 207 167 125

K/E 385 597 613 747

K/W 246 136 301 471

L 93 164 189 369

M/E 231 89 242 266

M/W 180 240 273 217

N 12 10 24 144

P/N 25 10 21 77

P/S 27 42 98 88

R/C 111 159 127 250

R/N 18 7 11 140

R/S 87 72 50 196

S 42 45 53 184

T 5 21 16 187

13



www.praja.org

23


VI. Section C: Questions asked by Municipal Councillors and MLAs

www.praja.org

24


Table 16: Questions asked on health by councillors (March 2012 to May 2012)

Ward Councillors Name Political Party Health

question Total question

F/N LalitaYadav* INC 1 1

F/N ManojkumarSansare IND 1 2

F/S NandkishorVichare SS 1 2

F/S Sanjay Ambole SS 1 2

G/N Sudhir Jadhav MNS 1 7

G/S MansiDalvi* SS 1 2

G/S Ratna Mahale NCP 1 3

G/S Sunil Ahir NCP 1 3

H/E Krishna Parkar BJP 1 3

H/E Pooja Mahadeshwar SS 1 2

H/E SnehalShinde* MNS 1 1

K/E ManishaPanchal* SS 2 4

K/W AmeetSatam BJP 1 3

K/W Dilip Patel* BJP 1 6

K/W YashodharPhanse SS 2 11

L Anuradha Pednekar* SS 3 8

L DilipLande MNS 1 10

L Saeeda Khan* NCP 6 6

M/E ReshmaNevrekar* SP 1 3

M/W Vandana Sable INC 1 5

N Bharti Bawadane* SS 1 6

P/N Kamarjaha Siddiqi INC 1 2

P/N ParminderBhamra* INC 1 1

P/N VinodShelar BJP 1 4

P/S PramilaShinde* SS 2 2

R/C Chetan Kadam MNS 2 3

R/C SandhyaDoshi NCP 1 5

R/N Hansaben Desai SS 1 2

R/N Prakash Darekar MNS 1 5

R/N Sheetal Ashok Mhatre INC 1 4

R/N Sheetal Mukesh Mhatre* SS 2 2

R/S SunitaYadav* BJP 1 1

T NandakumarVaity* NCP 1 3

City 194 Councillors have not asked a single

question on health 0 279

City 227 Councillors

45 403

Note - (*) This councillors are members in Health committee which has total of 35 members out of which only

14 members have asked questions on Health.

www.praja.org

25


Table 17: Issues raised/Questions asked by Councillors

Issues Question asked

Epidemic/Sensitive Diseases 4

Equipments 1

Health Related Issues 2

Human Resources 9

Infrastructure 10

Maternity homes / Primary Health Centre(PHC) 3

Mortality rate 1

Scam/Corruption 1

Schemes / Policies in Health 11

Treatment/Medicine 3

Total 45

www.praja.org

26


Table 18: Questions asked on health by MLAs14

during following sessions: Budget 2010, Monsoon

2010, Winter 2010, Budget 2011, Monsoon 2011 and Winter 2011

Name of MLA Political

Party Area

Health

Question

2010

Total

Question

2010

Health

Question

2011

Total

Question

2011

Gopal Shetty BJP Borivali 14 190 13 134

VinodGhosalkar SS Dahisar 20 270 31 347

PravinDarekar MNS Magathane 5 31 0 7

Sardar Singh BJP MulundAmboli 14 202 13 137

Mangesh Sangle MNS Vikhroli 18 261 39 345

ShishirShinde MNS Bhandup West 69 1144 63 960

RavindraWaikar SS Jogeshwari East 1 20 1 8

Rajhans Singh INC Dindoshi 1 15 0 2

Ramesh Thakur INC Kandivali East 32 371 31 349

YogeshSagar BJP Charkop 13 201 15 180

AslamShaikh INC Malad West 6 78 9 87

Subhash Desai SS Goregaon 3 55 2 17

BaldevKhosa INC Versova 6 51 4 37

Ashok Jadhav INC Andheri West 13 177 12 172

KrishnakumarHegde INC Vile Parle 35 480 40 472

Ramchandra Kadam MNS Ghatkopar West 34 764 53 771

Prakash Maheta BJP Ghatkopar East 3 69 3 34

Abu Azmi SP MankhurdShivaji Nagar 14 177 5 41

Nawab Malik NCP Anushakti Nagar 27 419 30 322

ChandrakantHandore INC Chembur 38 522 7 338

MilindKamble NCP Kurla (SC) 5 99 9 126

Kripashankar Singh INC Kalina 42 708 42 566

Prakash Sawant SS Vandre East 5 75 3 50

ZiyauddinSidikki INC Vandre West 12 261 31 441

Jagannath Shetty INC SionKoliwada 9 127 17 218

KalidasKolambkar INC Wadala 50 788 32 740

NitinSardesai MNS Mahim 49 620 55 610

BalaNandgaonkar MNS Shivadi 10 224 31 375

MadhukarChavan INC Byculla 72 1102 29 695

MangalLodha BJP Malbar Hill 49 732 20 552

Amin Patel INC Mumbadevi 37 506 43 504

Annie Shekhar INC Colaba 0 20 2 28

Total 706 10759 685 9665

14

Only 32 out of 36 MLAs representing Mumbai are shown in the table as the other four MLAs being ministers cannot ask

questions.

www.praja.org

27


Table 19: Issues raised/Questions asked by MLAs

Issues 2010 2011

Bio Medical Waste 7 0

Epidemic/Sensitive Diseases 154 58

Epidemic/Sensitive State Hospital 21 0

Equipments 51 3

Health Education/Institute 42 48

Maternity homes / Primary Health Centre(PHC) 6 23

Quacks 12 10

Health Service Related 3 3

Health Related Issues 18 17

Human Resource 118 112

Infrastructure 45 75

Mortality Rate 53 101

Private Health Service 12 5

Schemes / Policies in Health 109 202

Treatment/Medicine 55 28

Total 706 685

Documents

Health White Paper 2012