Impact beyond the ward
The same system that runs your hospital
runs the programmes it reports to.
Most hospital software treats national health programmes as paperwork bolted on at the end
of the month. HealthTeky treats them as the same clinical work, recorded once. The register
is a by-product of care rather than a separate evening job — which is the only version that
stays accurate.
Programme
Tuberculosis
The full NTEP path, inside the record rather than beside it.
- Notification with the fields the programme requires, validated at entry
- Regimen selection, weight-band dosing and the month-5 rule applied as a rule, not a reminder
- Contact tracing as a worklist, with each contact's screening status tracked
- Cohort outcomes assembled from what was recorded, not re-keyed at quarter end
Programme
Mother and child
The eight WHO antenatal contacts, and what has to happen at each.
- Pre-eclampsia risk and obstetric danger signs surfaced at every contact
- Growth measurements scored as z-scores against WHO standards
- Immunisation due and overdue, per child, as a callable list
- Missed contacts become a recall worklist instead of a gap nobody sees
Programme
Chronic disease and prevention
Control, not attendance — the question a register should answer.
- Is this patient actually controlled, and what should change — prepared for a prescriber to sign
- Control rates per register, with the gap a headline average hides
- Screening and vaccination gaps, each with the rule that produced it
- Who to call this week, ranked, rather than a list of everyone enrolled
Programme
Syndromic surveillance
Does today look unusual, and where.
- Case patterns watched continuously against the hospital's own baseline
- Signals raised on the data as recorded, independent of who is looking at the screen
- Geography surfaced with the signal, so the question "where" has an answer
- Every signal written to the audit trail with the evidence behind it
Why this matters commercially
This is not corporate social responsibility. It is why the platform wins a certain kind of deal.
1Government and trust hospitals are scored on programme performance.
A system that produces accurate NTEP and immunisation returns as a by-product of care is not a nice-to-have in that setting — it is the procurement criterion.
2Multi-site groups carry the same programmes at every site.
Running them on one platform means one definition of "controlled", one register, and comparison between sites that actually means something.
3The clinical work and the reporting are the same work.
Registers that are filled in separately drift from the record. The register is the record here, which is why the returns reconcile.
4Reach does not require a new licence per programme.
All of it is in the same Enterprise plan as the rest of the AI layer.
Built for where care actually happens
Patients answer on their own phone
Pre-visit history and post-discharge check-ins run on a tokenised link — no app, no account, no password for someone to lose.
In their own language
Intake and patient instructions are multilingual, because a discharge summary a patient cannot read is a readmission waiting to happen.
It degrades rather than stops
The clinical engines are deterministic and run locally. If the language model is unreachable, scoring, triage and safety checks keep working.
No outcome claims on this page. We have not written that HealthTeky improves
TB cure rates or reduces maternal mortality, because we have no study that shows it and a
page that claims it would not survive your first question. What is described here is what the
software does; whether it moves an indicator in your setting is what a pilot is for.
Talk to us about programme reporting
Tell us which returns your sites file today and how long they take. That conversation is usually shorter and more convincing than a demo.
Talk to us about Enterprise
See all plans