Interventions to improve district-level routine health data in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Abstract

BackgroundRoutine health information system(s) (RHIS) facilitate the collection of health data at all levels of the health system allowing estimates of disease prevalence, treatment and preventive intervention coverage, and risk factors to guide disease control strategies. This core health system pillar remains underdeveloped in many low-income and middle-income countries. Efforts to improve RHIS data coverage, quality and timeliness were launched over 10 years ago.MethodsA systematic review was performed across 12 databases and literature search engines for both peer-reviewed articles and grey literature reports on RHIS interventions. Studies were analysed in three stages: (1) categorisation of RHIS intervention components and processes; (2) comparison of intervention component effectiveness and (3) whether the post-intervention outcome improved above the WHO integrated disease surveillance response framework data quality standard of 80% or above.Results5294 references were screened, resulting in 56 studies. Three key performance determinants—technical, organisational and behavioural—were proposed as critical to RHIS strengthening. Seventy-seven per cent [77%] of studies identified addressed all three determinants. The most frequently implemented intervention components were ‘providing training’ and ‘using an electronic health management information systems’. Ninety-three per cent [93%] of pre–post or controlled trial studies showed improvements in one or more data quality outputs, but after applying a standard threshold of >80% post-intervention, this number reduced to 68%. There was an observed benefit of multi-component interventions that either conducted data quality training or that addressed improvement across multiple processes and determinants of RHIS.ConclusionHolistic data quality interventions that address multiple determinants should be continuously practised for strengthening RHIS. Studies with clearly defined and pragmatic outcomes are required for future RHIS improvement interventions. These should be accompanied by qualitative studies and cost analyses to understand which investments are needed to sustain high-quality RHIS in low-income and middle-income countries.

Regular measurement is essential but insufficient to improve quality of healthcare

“…Health information systems in countries across all income levels fall short of their potential to contribute to improving health system performance because of three interrelated factors: technical limitations, including poorly structured data collection tools, limited interoperability, and inadequate investment in maintenance, support, and data privacy567; behavioural factors, such as poor motivation to generate high quality data89; and organisational determinants often arising from weak governance and resource constraints resulting in understaffing, commodity shortages, and limited workforce skills in data management and data use for quality improvement 910. Further, in many settings, health information technologies do not capture important measures of quality of care regularly.…”

Artificial intelligence for strengthening healthcare systems in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic scoping review

“…Furthermore, given the shortages of skilled health workers in areas such as sub-Saharan Africa, where medical education capacities are limited 12 , AIpowered clinical tools could represent one way to increase quantity and quality of medical care 13 . However, current AI applications and machine learning still require large amounts of complete and regularly updated datasets, which still remain scarce for most LMICs 14 . While reports on the application of different AI technologies in LMICs continue to grow, the actual evidence base has so far not been reviewed.…”

Addressing the Need for a Preexposure Prophylaxis Monitoring and Evaluation Implementation Guide: Experience From Zambia

“…24,25 The use of EHRs has improved the efficiency of service delivery and data quality, reducing gaps along the HIV care continuum and evaluating programs to guide continuous improvement and decision-making. [26][27][28][29] BOX. Zambia Preexposure Prophylaxis Risk-Based Eligibility Criteria (2022) Persons at substantial risk for HIV infection, defined as engaging in one or more of the following activities within the last 6 months, are recommended for preexposure prophylaxis:…”