Testing for hepatitis B during pregnancy is an important part of antenatal care because it identifies women who may need further assessment and helps health services prepare measures that reduce mother-to-child transmission. In the World Health Organization (WHO) country data for 2024, the share of pregnant women attending antenatal care who were tested for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) varies widely. Across the 103 country and area observations actually dated 2024, the median is 79%.
This measure is not hepatitis B prevalence and it is not the percentage of all pregnant women in a country who were tested. Its denominator is pregnant women attending antenatal care services, while its numerator is those who received an HBsAg test during pregnancy. WHO treats antenatal HBsAg testing as the first step in preventing mother-to-child transmission of hepatitis B, and relevant programme frameworks use at least 90% coverage as an important benchmark.
Table of Contents
What antenatal HBsAg testing coverage measures
WHO defines this indicator as the percentage of pregnant women attending antenatal care (ANC) services who were tested for hepatitis B surface antigen during pregnancy. HBsAg is the standard surface-antigen marker used to identify hepatitis B virus infection. A positive screening result can lead to additional assessment, including viral-load testing where available, to determine whether antiviral prophylaxis is indicated during pregnancy.
The map therefore answers a service-coverage question rather than an epidemiological prevalence question. A value close to 100% means that nearly all pregnant women represented in the ANC denominator were reported as having received an HBsAg test. A low value indicates limited reported testing coverage within that denominator. The proportion who test positive and the proportion of eligible HBV-infected pregnant women who receive antiviral prophylaxis are separate indicators with different numerators and denominators.
WHO places this testing step within its broader triple-elimination approach for HIV, syphilis and hepatitis B. Antenatal testing creates an opportunity to identify infection, assess the mother, plan prophylaxis when appropriate, and ensure that exposed infants receive timely prevention measures after birth. The indicator is therefore best read as one link in a prevention pathway rather than as a stand-alone score for a national health system.
The 2024 median is 79% across 103 observations
The retained latest-value table has 107 country and area rows, but only 103 are dated 2024. Restricting the comparison to those same-year rows gives a median of 79%. The simple unweighted mean is 66.7%, although the source includes one value above the conceptual 100% ceiling, so the median and band distribution are more informative than the mean for a quick cross-country summary.
Twenty-one 2024 observations are below 25%, eight are from 25% to under 50%, 18 are from 50% to under 75%, and 10 are from 75% to under 90%. Another 45 are in the 90–100% band. If the single above-100 source value were counted mechanically, 46 observations would be at least 90%; this article does not treat that anomalous value as straightforward evidence of target attainment.
Reported coverage spans from near-universal testing to very low levels
Several 2024 observations are reported at 100%, including the United Arab Emirates, Armenia, Antigua and Barbuda, Brunei Darussalam, Bhutan, Denmark, Japan and the United Kingdom. France is 97%, Brazil 95%, Uruguay 96%, and the Maldives 91%. These values indicate very broad HBsAg testing among the pregnant women represented in reported antenatal-care services.
At the lower end, Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Mali, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines are each reported at 1%. Sierra Leone is 2%, Myanmar 3%, Gambia 4%, and Sri Lanka and the Central African Republic 5%. Differences in national reporting systems, facility coverage, programme implementation and denominator construction can all affect the figures, so the map does not establish one common cause for the gaps.
| Country or area | HBsAg testing coverage in 2024 |
|---|---|
| Japan | 100% |
| United Kingdom | 100% |
| France | 97% |
| Brazil | 95% |
| Germany | 85% |
| Republic of Korea | 64% |
| South Africa | 66% |
| India | 40% |
| Nigeria | 18% |
| Burundi | 1% |
The Republic of Korea is reported at 64%
In the 2024 WHO extract, the Republic of Korea is reported at 64%. Japan is at 100%, France 97%, Brazil 95%, Germany 85%, South Africa 66%, India 40%, and Nigeria 18%. These values should be interpreted within the indicator denominator: women attending antenatal care services as represented in the reporting system. They do not necessarily equal the share of every pregnancy nationwide that received a test.
Administrative programme indicators can be sensitive to whether laboratory records and antenatal-care registers cover the same facilities and reporting period. WHO strategic-information guidance notes that national programme records are preferred, while sentinel surveillance or special studies may be used when routine national data are unavailable, in which case source coverage and representativeness need to be documented. Small percentage differences should therefore not be overread as precise rankings of programme quality.
Kyrgyzstan’s 106% source value is a reporting warning, not literal coverage
The source table reports 106% for Kyrgyzstan in 2024. Under the indicator definition—number of pregnant women tested for HBsAg divided by pregnant women attending antenatal care services—the conceptual range would normally stop at 100%. A reported value of 106% should therefore be read as a warning that the numerator and denominator may not align perfectly in reporting scope, timing or subsequent revision, rather than as a literal claim that 106% of the target population was tested.
This article does not silently cap or rewrite the value. The original number is retained, but it is separated from the 90–100% band in the distribution chart and is not presented as the top-performing country. Preserving the source while flagging the inconsistency is more transparent than converting it to 100% or using it in a league-table interpretation.
Four older latest observations are excluded from the 2024 comparison
Four of the 107 retained latest observations are not dated 2024: China is 99.5% in 2023, South Sudan 4.4% in 2022, Iran 45.6% in 2021, and Mauritius 100% in 2021. They remain useful as the latest available values for those countries, but they are excluded from the 2024 median, distribution and comparison table so that different reporting years are not mixed into the same ranking.
Countries missing from this extract are also not converted to 0%. Missing data means that no retained comparable observation is present here; it does not mean no pregnant women were tested. The map therefore distinguishes observed low values from places with no 2024 value in the dataset.
Why hepatitis B testing during pregnancy matters
Hepatitis B can be transmitted from mother to child, and infection acquired around birth or in early childhood has a high probability of becoming chronic. WHO recommends integrating HBsAg screening into antenatal care, alongside HIV and syphilis testing, as early as possible in pregnancy. Identifying an HBsAg-positive woman allows follow-up assessment and, when indicated, antiviral prophylaxis during pregnancy, while also helping services prepare timely infant vaccination and other post-exposure measures.
That is why testing coverage is useful even though it does not measure infection itself. Low testing coverage can reduce the chance of identifying women who need the next steps in the prevention pathway. At the same time, a high percentage does not prove that all later steps—confirmatory assessment, prophylaxis, timely birth-dose vaccination and follow-up—are equally strong. Those elements require their own indicators.
Data source and calculation method
The statistical source is the WHO Global Health Observatory indicator HEPATITIS_HBV_TESTING_ANC_PERCENT. WHO strategic-information guidance defines the numerator as pregnant women tested for HBsAg and the denominator as pregnant women attending antenatal care services. The indicator is used to monitor the testing step in programmes working toward elimination of mother-to-child transmission of hepatitis B.
For the same-year comparison, this article uses only the 103 observations dated 2024 from the 107-row latest-value table. Missing data are not set to zero, and the 2021–2023 latest observations are not carried forward to 2024. Kyrgyzstan’s 106% value is preserved as reported but flagged separately. The 79% median and all band counts are therefore simple country-level summaries, not a global pregnancy-weighted coverage rate.
The indicator family is described on the WHO Global Health Observatory page for hepatitis B testing and treatment among women attending antenatal care. The prevention context is explained by the WHO Triple Elimination Initiative and the 2024 WHO hepatitis B guidelines.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Korea’s 64% mean 64% of all pregnant women nationally were tested?
Not necessarily. The WHO denominator is pregnant women attending antenatal care services as represented in the reporting system, not every pregnancy in the country. Reporting coverage and representativeness also matter.
What is the WHO benchmark for antenatal HBsAg testing coverage?
WHO programme frameworks use at least 90% antenatal HBsAg testing coverage as an important target in the applicable mother-to-child transmission prevention context.
How should Kyrgyzstan’s reported 106% be interpreted?
Because the indicator divides women tested by women attending antenatal care, values above 100% are not literal population coverage. The source value is retained but should be treated as a reporting or denominator-alignment warning.
Does higher HBsAg testing coverage mean hepatitis B is more common?
No. This indicator measures testing coverage, not infection prevalence. HBsAg positivity among those tested is a separate indicator, as is antiviral prophylaxis coverage among eligible infected pregnant women.
Related Articles
Antenatal hepatitis B testing is one part of a wider testing, diagnosis and treatment pathway. These verified Green Map insights provide related WHO-based context on infectious-disease testing and care.
- How Often Do HIV Tests Return Positive? Country Comparison
- Hepatitis C Diagnosis Coverage Map | Latest Country Data
- Hepatitis C Treatment Among Diagnosed People Map
Green Map creates custom-edited map images using open geographic data sources such as geoBoundaries, Natural Earth, OpenStreetMap, and government open data.
These maps are edited visual materials, not raw data files, and are provided for education, documents, presentations, and graphic reference.
