Dataset Information

Methods to measure quality of care and quality indicators through health facility surveys in low- and middle-income countries.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Present methods to measure standardized, replicable and comparable metrics to measure quality of medical care in low- and middle-income countries.

Design

We constructed quality indicators for maternal, neonatal and child care. To minimize reviewer judgment, we transformed criteria from check-lists into data points and decisions into conditional algorithms. Distinct criteria were established for each facility level and type of care. Indicators were linked to discharge diagnoses. We designed electronic abstraction tools using computer-assisted personal interviewing software.

Setting

We present results for data collected in the poorest areas of Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama and the state of Chiapas in Mexico (January-October 2014).

Results

We collected data from 12 662 medical records. Indicators show variations of quality of care between and within countries. Routine interventions, such as quality antenatal care (ANC), immediate neonatal care and postpartum contraception, had low levels of compliance. Records that complied with quality ANC ranged from 68.8% [confidence interval (CI):64.5-72.9] in Costa Rica to 5.7% [CI:4.0-8.0] in Guatemala. Less than 25% of obstetric and neonatal complications were managed according to standards in all countries.

Conclusions

Our study underscores that, with adequate resources and technical expertise, collecting data for quality indicators at scale in low- and middle-income countries is possible. Our indicators offer a comparable, replicable and standardized framework to identify variations on quality of care. The indicators and methods described are highly transferable and could be used to measure quality of care in other countries.

SUBMITTER: Rios-Zertuche D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6464097 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPrimary care has the potential to address a large proportion of people's health needs, promote equity, and contain costs, but only if it provides high-quality health services that people want to use. 40 years after the Declaration of Alma-Ata, little is known about the quality of primary care in low-income and middle-income countries. We assessed whether existing facility surveys capture relevant aspects of primary care performance and summarised the quality of primary care in ten low-income and middle-income countries.MethodsWe used Service Provision Assessment surveys, the most comprehensive nationally representative surveys of health systems, to select indicators corresponding to three of the process quality domains (competent systems, evidence-based care, and user experience) identified by the Lancet Global Health Commission on High Quality Health Systems in the Sustainable Development Goals Era. We calculated composite and domain quality scores for first-level primary care facilities across and within ten countries with available facility assessment data (Ethiopia, Haiti, Kenya, Malawi, Namibia, Nepal, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, and Uganda).FindingsData were available for 7049 facilities and 63 869 care visits. There were gaps in measurement of important outcomes such as user experience, health outcomes, and confidence, and processes such as timely action, choice of provider, affordability, ease of use, dignity, privacy, non-discrimination, autonomy, and confidentiality. No information about care competence was available outside maternal and child health. Overall, scores for primary care quality were low (mean 0·41 on a scale of 0 to 1). At a domain level, scores were lowest for user experience, followed by evidence-based care, and then competent systems. At the subdomain level, scores for patient focus, prevention and detection, technical quality of sick-child care, and population-health management were lower than those for other subdomains.InterpretationFacility surveys do not capture key elements of primary care quality. The available measures suggest major gaps in primary care quality. If not addressed, these gaps will limit the contribution of primary care to reaching the ambitious Sustainable Development Goals.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Project description:PurposeTo develop a set of actionable quality indicators for critical care suitable for use in low- or middle-income countries (LMICs).MethodsA list of 84 candidate indicators compiled from a previous literature review and stakeholder recommendations were categorised into three domains (foundation, process, and quality impact). An expert panel (EP) representing stakeholders from critical care and allied specialties in multiple low-, middle-, and high-income countries was convened. In rounds one and two of the Delphi exercise, the EP appraised (Likert scale 1-5) each indicator for validity, feasibility; in round three sensitivity to change, and reliability were additionally appraised. Potential barriers and facilitators to implementation of the quality indicators were also reported in this round. Median score and interquartile range (IQR) were used to determine consensus; indicators with consensus disagreement (median < 4, IQR ≤ 1) were removed, and indicators with consensus agreement (median ≥ 4, IQR ≤ 1) or no consensus were retained. In round four, indicators were prioritised based on their ability to impact cost of care to the provider and recipient, staff well-being, patient safety, and patient-centred outcomes.ResultsSeventy-one experts from 30 countries (n = 45, 63%, representing critical care) selected 57 indicators to assess quality of care in intensive care unit (ICU) in LMICs: 16 foundation, 27 process, and 14 quality impact indicators after round three. Round 4 resulted in 14 prioritised indicators. Fifty-seven respondents reported barriers and facilitators, of which electronic registry-embedded data collection was the biggest perceived facilitator to implementation (n = 54/57, 95%) Concerns over burden of data collection (n = 53/57, 93%) and variations in definition (n = 45/57, 79%) were perceived as the greatest barrier to implementation.ConclusionThis consensus exercise provides a common set of indicators to support benchmarking and quality improvement programs for critical care populations in LMICs.

Project description:ObjectiveMany low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) struggle to provide the health services investment required for life-saving congenital heart disease (CHD) surgery. We explored associations between risk-adjusted CHD surgical mortality from 17 LMICs and global development indices to identify patterns that might inform investment strategies.DesignRetrospective analysis: country-specific standardised mortality ratios were graphed against global development indices reflective of wealth and healthcare investment. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated.Setting and participantsThe International Quality Improvement Collaborative (IQIC) keeps a volunteer registry of outcomes of CHD surgery programmes in low-resource settings. Inclusion in the IQIC is voluntary enrolment by hospital sites. Patients in the registry underwent congenital heart surgery. Sites that actively participated in IQIC in 2013, 2014 or 2015 and passed a 10% data audit were asked for permission to share data for this study. 31 sites in 17 countries are included.Outcome measuresIn-hospital mortality: standardised mortality ratios were calculated. Risk adjustment for in-hospital mortality uses the Risk Adjustment for Congenital Heart Surgery method, a model including surgical risk category, age group, prematurity, presence of a major non-cardiac structural anomaly and multiple congenital heart procedures during admission.ResultsThe IQIC registry includes 24 917 congenital heart surgeries performed in children<18 years of age. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 5.0%. Country-level congenital heart surgery standardised mortality ratios were negatively correlated with gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (r=-0.34, p=0.18), and health expenditure per capita (r=-0.23, p=0.37) and positively correlated with under-five mortality (r=0.60, p=0.01) and undernourishment (r=0.39, p=0.17). Countries with lower development had wider variation in mortality. GDP per capita is a driver of the association between some other measures and mortality.ConclusionsResults display a moderate relationship among wealth, healthcare investment and malnutrition, with significant variation, including superior results in many countries with low GDP per capita. These findings provide context and optimism for investment in CHD procedures in low-resource settings.

Project description:Child undernutrition has multifactorial causes, ranging from food insecurity to etiologies refractory to conventional nutritional approaches, such as infections, environmental enteric dysfunction, and other conditions that lead to systemic inflammation. Poor appetite may be an important symptom of these causes and may be a useful marker of an undernourished child's ability to recover. We conducted a systematic review to characterize the methods and tools to measure appetite among children <5 y old in low- and middle-income countries. A systematic search of 8 databases identified 23 eligible studies published since 1995. Thirteen described methods based on direct feeding observation or quantification of nutrient intake from caregiver report, 16 described tools that assessed caregiver perceptions of appetite, and 6 reported assessments in both categories. Four studies that gauged caregiver perceptions assessed multiple appetite domains, whereas 12 assessed 1 domain-often with a single question. Only 6 studies reported validation processes, the most common of which compared an observed test meal with daily energy intake. No studies reported the use of a method or tool that was validated in multiple cultural or linguistic contexts. Although dietary intake measures and observed feeding tests have shown validity in some contexts, they are resource intensive. Subjective caregiver questionnaires may offer a more efficient appetite evaluation method, but they have been evaluated less consistently. A rigorously developed and validated tool to rapidly assess child appetite is needed and could be best addressed by a questionnaire that leverages the multiple domains of appetite. The application of interventions that target causes of undernutrition that are not amenable to food-based interventions in clinical or research contexts could be facilitated by an efficient appetite screening tool to identify appetite-related causes of undernutrition and to monitor children's response to such interventions.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:The maternal near-miss case review (NMCR) has been promoted by WHO as an approach to improve quality of care (QoC) at facility level. This systematic review synthesises evidence on the effectiveness of the NMCR on QoC and maternal and perinatal health outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS:Studies were searched for in six electronic databases (MEDLINE, Index Medicus, Web of Science, the Cochrane library, Embase, LILACS), with no language restrictions. Two authors independently screened papers and selected them for inclusion and independently extracted data. Maternal mortality was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included any outcome informing on any of the six dimensions of QoC: efficacy, safety, efficiency, equity, accessibility and timely care, acceptability and patient-centred care. RESULTS:Out of 24?822 papers retrieved, 17 studies from 11 countries were included. Maternal mortality measured before and after the implementation of the NMCR cycle significantly decreased (OR 0.77, 95%?CI 0.61 to 0.98, eight studies, 55 573 043 women; I2=39%). A statistically significant reduction in the incidence of uterine rupture, postpartum haemorrhage and maternal sepsis was observed in three out of six studies. Ten studies reporting on maternal care process all showed some significant improvement when measured against predefined standards. All studies reported that the NMCR resulted in some amelioration of the facility structure (physical structure, staffing, equipment, training, organisation of care). Newborn outcomes were overall poorly reported; four studies showed no significant difference in perinatal mortality. Patient satisfaction and equity were also poorly reported. CONCLUSIONS:Policy makers may consider implementing the maternal NMCR cycle approach among strategies aiming at improving QoC and reducing maternal mortality and morbidity in LMIC. Future studies should better document the effectiveness of the NMCR cycle particularly on outcomes reflecting patient-centred care and cost-effectiveness.

Project description:BackgroundThe 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set an ambitious new benchmark for safely managed drinking water services (SMDWs), but many countries lack national data on the availability and quality of drinking water.ObjectivesWe quantified the availability and microbiological quality of drinking water, monitored SMDWs, and examined risk factors for Escherichia coli (E. coli) contamination in 27 low-and middle-income countries (LMICs).MethodsA new water quality module for household surveys was implemented in 27 Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys. Teams used portable equipment to measure E. coli at the point of collection (PoC, n=61,170) and at the point of use (PoU, n=64,900) and asked respondents about the availability and accessibility of drinking water. Households were classified as having SMDW services if they used an improved water source that was free of E. coli contamination at PoC, accessible on premises, and available when needed. Compliance with individual SMDW criteria was also assessed. Modified Poisson regression was used to explore household and community risk factors for E. coli contamination.ResultsE. coli was commonly detected at the PoC (range 16-90%) and was more likely at the PoU (range 19-99%). On average, 84% of households used an improved drinking water source, and 31% met all of the SMDW criteria. E. coli contamination was the primary reason SMDW criteria were not met (15 of 27 countries). The prevalence of E. coli in PoC samples was lower among households using improved water sources [risk ratio (RR)=0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64, 0.85] but not for households with water accessible on premises (RR=0.99; 95% CI: 0.94, 1.05) or available when needed (RR=0.95; 95% CI: 0.88, 1.02). E. coli contamination of PoU samples was less common for households in the richest vs. poorest wealth quintile (RR=0.70; 95% CI: 0.55, 0.88) and in communities with high (>75%) improved sanitation coverage (RR=0.94; 95% CI: 0.90, 0.97). Livestock ownership (RR=1.08; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.13), rural vs. urban residence (RR=1.10; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.16), and wet vs. dry season sampling (RR=1.07; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.15) were positively associated with contamination at the PoU.DiscussionCross-sectional water quality data can be collected in household surveys and can be used to assess inequalities in service levels, to track the SDG indicator of SMDWs, and to examine risk factors for contamination. There is an urgent need for better risk management to reduce widespread exposure to fecal contamination through drinking water services in LMICs. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP8459.