Leveraging routine data in impact evaluation: Understanding data systems in primary healthcare prior to a matched cluster-randomised evaluation of adherence guidelines in South Africa
Background. An essential part of providing high-quality patient care and a means of efficiently conducting research studies relies upon high-quality routinely collected medical information. Objectives. To describe the registers, paper records and databases used in a sample of primary healthcare cli...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
South African Medical Association
2022-10-01
|
| Series: | South African Medical Journal |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://samajournals.co.za/index.php/samj/article/view/260 |
| _version_ | 1797369973218213888 |
|---|---|
| author | AN Huber S Pascoe MP Fox J Murphy M Mphokojoe M Gorgens D Wilson Y Pillay N Fraser-Hurt |
| author_facet | AN Huber S Pascoe MP Fox J Murphy M Mphokojoe M Gorgens D Wilson Y Pillay N Fraser-Hurt |
| author_sort | AN Huber |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
Background. An essential part of providing high-quality patient care and a means of efficiently conducting research studies relies upon high-quality routinely collected medical information.
Objectives. To describe the registers, paper records and databases used in a sample of primary healthcare clinics in South Africa (SA) with the view to conduct an impact evaluation using routine data.
Methods. Between October 2015 and December 2015, we collected information on the presence, quality and completeness of registers, clinical stationery and databases at 24 public health facilities in SA. We describe each register and type of clinical stationery we encountered, their primary uses, and the quality of completion. We also mapped the ideal flow of data through a site to better understand how its data collection works.
Results. We identified 13 registers (9 standard, 4 non-standard), 5 types of stationery and 4 databases as sources of medical information within a site. Not all clinics used all the standardised registers, and in those that did, registers were kept in various degrees of completeness: a common problem was inconsistent recording of folder numbers. The quality of patient stationery was generally high, with only the chronic patient record being considered of varied quality. The TIER.Net database had high-quality information on key variables, but national identification (ID) number was incompletely captured (42% complete). Very few evaluation sites used electronic data collection systems for conditions other than HIV/AIDS.
Conclusion. Registers, databases and clinical stationery were not implemented or completed consistently across the 24 evaluation sites. For those considering using routinely collected data for research and evaluation purposes, we would recommend a thorough review of clinic data collection systems for both quality and completeness before considering them to be a reliable data source.
|
| first_indexed | 2024-03-08T17:54:41Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-d5de658c459540a186bec948bc318b95 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0256-9574 2078-5135 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-08T17:54:41Z |
| publishDate | 2022-10-01 |
| publisher | South African Medical Association |
| record_format | Article |
| series | South African Medical Journal |
| spelling | doaj.art-d5de658c459540a186bec948bc318b952024-01-02T05:56:26ZengSouth African Medical AssociationSouth African Medical Journal0256-95742078-51352022-10-011121010.7196/SAMJ.2022.v112i10.14909264Leveraging routine data in impact evaluation: Understanding data systems in primary healthcare prior to a matched cluster-randomised evaluation of adherence guidelines in South AfricaAN Huber0S Pascoe1MP Fox2J Murphy3M Mphokojoe4M Gorgens5D Wilson6Y Pillay7N Fraser-Hurt81 Health Economics and Epidemiology Research Office, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South AfricaHealth Economics and Epidemiology Research Office, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South AfricaHealth Economics and Epidemiology Research Office, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa; Department of Global Health, Boston University School of Public Health, USA; Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, USA Health Economics and Epidemiology Research Office, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South AfricaDivision of Health Systems and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South AfricaThe World Bank Group,Washington DC, USAThe World Bank Group,Washington DC, USADivision of Health Systems and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South AfricaThe World Bank Group,Washington DC, USA Background. An essential part of providing high-quality patient care and a means of efficiently conducting research studies relies upon high-quality routinely collected medical information. Objectives. To describe the registers, paper records and databases used in a sample of primary healthcare clinics in South Africa (SA) with the view to conduct an impact evaluation using routine data. Methods. Between October 2015 and December 2015, we collected information on the presence, quality and completeness of registers, clinical stationery and databases at 24 public health facilities in SA. We describe each register and type of clinical stationery we encountered, their primary uses, and the quality of completion. We also mapped the ideal flow of data through a site to better understand how its data collection works. Results. We identified 13 registers (9 standard, 4 non-standard), 5 types of stationery and 4 databases as sources of medical information within a site. Not all clinics used all the standardised registers, and in those that did, registers were kept in various degrees of completeness: a common problem was inconsistent recording of folder numbers. The quality of patient stationery was generally high, with only the chronic patient record being considered of varied quality. The TIER.Net database had high-quality information on key variables, but national identification (ID) number was incompletely captured (42% complete). Very few evaluation sites used electronic data collection systems for conditions other than HIV/AIDS. Conclusion. Registers, databases and clinical stationery were not implemented or completed consistently across the 24 evaluation sites. For those considering using routinely collected data for research and evaluation purposes, we would recommend a thorough review of clinic data collection systems for both quality and completeness before considering them to be a reliable data source. https://samajournals.co.za/index.php/samj/article/view/260HIV and AIDSPrimary care |
| spellingShingle | AN Huber S Pascoe MP Fox J Murphy M Mphokojoe M Gorgens D Wilson Y Pillay N Fraser-Hurt Leveraging routine data in impact evaluation: Understanding data systems in primary healthcare prior to a matched cluster-randomised evaluation of adherence guidelines in South Africa South African Medical Journal HIV and AIDS Primary care |
| title | Leveraging routine data in impact evaluation: Understanding data systems in primary healthcare prior to a matched cluster-randomised evaluation of adherence guidelines in South Africa |
| title_full | Leveraging routine data in impact evaluation: Understanding data systems in primary healthcare prior to a matched cluster-randomised evaluation of adherence guidelines in South Africa |
| title_fullStr | Leveraging routine data in impact evaluation: Understanding data systems in primary healthcare prior to a matched cluster-randomised evaluation of adherence guidelines in South Africa |
| title_full_unstemmed | Leveraging routine data in impact evaluation: Understanding data systems in primary healthcare prior to a matched cluster-randomised evaluation of adherence guidelines in South Africa |
| title_short | Leveraging routine data in impact evaluation: Understanding data systems in primary healthcare prior to a matched cluster-randomised evaluation of adherence guidelines in South Africa |
| title_sort | leveraging routine data in impact evaluation understanding data systems in primary healthcare prior to a matched cluster randomised evaluation of adherence guidelines in south africa |
| topic | HIV and AIDS Primary care |
| url | https://samajournals.co.za/index.php/samj/article/view/260 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT anhuber leveragingroutinedatainimpactevaluationunderstandingdatasystemsinprimaryhealthcarepriortoamatchedclusterrandomisedevaluationofadherenceguidelinesinsouthafrica AT spascoe leveragingroutinedatainimpactevaluationunderstandingdatasystemsinprimaryhealthcarepriortoamatchedclusterrandomisedevaluationofadherenceguidelinesinsouthafrica AT mpfox leveragingroutinedatainimpactevaluationunderstandingdatasystemsinprimaryhealthcarepriortoamatchedclusterrandomisedevaluationofadherenceguidelinesinsouthafrica AT jmurphy leveragingroutinedatainimpactevaluationunderstandingdatasystemsinprimaryhealthcarepriortoamatchedclusterrandomisedevaluationofadherenceguidelinesinsouthafrica AT mmphokojoe leveragingroutinedatainimpactevaluationunderstandingdatasystemsinprimaryhealthcarepriortoamatchedclusterrandomisedevaluationofadherenceguidelinesinsouthafrica AT mgorgens leveragingroutinedatainimpactevaluationunderstandingdatasystemsinprimaryhealthcarepriortoamatchedclusterrandomisedevaluationofadherenceguidelinesinsouthafrica AT dwilson leveragingroutinedatainimpactevaluationunderstandingdatasystemsinprimaryhealthcarepriortoamatchedclusterrandomisedevaluationofadherenceguidelinesinsouthafrica AT ypillay leveragingroutinedatainimpactevaluationunderstandingdatasystemsinprimaryhealthcarepriortoamatchedclusterrandomisedevaluationofadherenceguidelinesinsouthafrica AT nfraserhurt leveragingroutinedatainimpactevaluationunderstandingdatasystemsinprimaryhealthcarepriortoamatchedclusterrandomisedevaluationofadherenceguidelinesinsouthafrica |