Dataset Information

Improving quality of medical certification of causes of death in health facilities in Tanzania 2014-2019.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Monitoring medically certified causes of death is essential to shape national health policies, track progress to Sustainable Development Goals, and gauge responses to epidemic and pandemic disease. The combination of electronic health information systems with new methods for data quality monitoring can facilitate quality assessments and help target quality improvement. Since 2015, Tanzania has been upgrading its Civil Registration and Vital Statistics system including efforts to improve the availability and quality of mortality data.

Methods

We used a computer application (ANACONDA v4.01) to assess the quality of medical certification of cause of death (MCCD) and ICD-10 coding for the underlying cause of death for 155,461 deaths from health facilities from 2014 to 2018. From 2018 to 2019, we continued quality analysis for 2690 deaths in one large administrative region 9 months before, and 9 months following MCCD quality improvement interventions. Interventions addressed governance, training, process, and practice. We assessed changes in the levels, distributions, and nature of unusable and insufficiently specified codes, and how these influenced estimates of the leading causes of death.

Results

9.7% of expected annual deaths in Tanzania obtained a medically certified cause of death. Of these, 52% of MCCD ICD-10 codes were usable for health policy and planning, with no significant improvement over 5 years. Of certified deaths, 25% had unusable codes, 17% had insufficiently specified codes, and 6% were undetermined causes. Comparing the before and after intervention periods in one Region, codes usable for public health policy purposes improved from 48 to 65% within 1 year and the resulting distortions in the top twenty cause-specific mortality fractions due to unusable causes reduced from 27.4 to 13.5%.

Conclusion

Data from less than 5% of annual deaths in Tanzania are usable for informing policy. For deaths with medical certification, errors were prevalent in almost half. This constrains capacity to monitor the 15 SDG indicators that require cause-specific mortality. Sustainable quality assurance mechanisms and interventions can result in rapid improvements in the quality of medically certified causes of death. ANACONDA provides an effective means for evaluation of such changes and helps target interventions to remaining weaknesses.

SUBMITTER: Nyondo T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8436444 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDetailed cause of death data by age group and sex are critical to identify key public health issues and target interventions appropriately. In this study the quality of local routinely collected cause of death data from medical certification is reviewed, and a cause of death profile for Tonga based on amended data is presented.MethodsMedical certificates of death for all deaths in Tonga for 2001 to 2008 and medical records for all deaths in the main island Tongatapu for 2008 were sought from the national hospital. Cause of death data for 2008 were reviewed for quality through (a) a review of current tabulation procedures and (b) a medical record review. Data from each medical record were extracted and provided to an independent medical doctor to assign cause of death, with underlying cause from the medical record tabulated against underlying cause from the medical certificate. Significant associations in reporting patterns were evaluated and final cause of death for each case in 2008 was assigned based on the best quality information from the medical certificate or medical record. Cause of death data from 2001 to 2007 were revised based on findings from the evaluation of certification of the 2008 data and added to the dataset. Proportional mortality was calculated and applied to age- and sex-specific mortality for all causes from 2001 to 2008. Cause of death was tabulated by age group and sex, and age-standardized (all ages) mortality rates for each sex by cause were calculated.ResultsReported tabulations of cause of death in Tonga are of immediate cause, with ischemic heart disease and diabetes underrepresented. In the majority of cases the reported (immediate) cause fell within the same broad category as the underlying cause of death from the medical certificate. Underlying cause of death from the medical certificate, attributed to neoplasms, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease were assigned to other underlying causes by the medical record review in 70% to 77% of deaths. Of the 28 (6.5%) deaths attributed to nonspecific or unknown causes on the medical certificate, 17 were able to be attributed elsewhere following review of the medical record. Final cause of death tabulations for 2001 to 2008 demonstrate that noncommunicable diseases are leading adult mortality, and age-standardized rates for cardiovascular diseases, neoplasms, and diabetes increased significantly between 2001 to 2004 and 2005 to 2008. Cause of death data for 2001 to 2008 show increasing cause-specific mortality (deaths per 100,000) from 2001-2004 to 2005-2008 from cardiovascular (194-382 to 423-644 in 2005-2008 for males and 108-227 to 194-321 for females) and other noncommunicable diseases that cannot be accounted for by changes in the age structure of the population. Mortality from diabetes for 2005 to 2008 is estimated at 94 to 222 deaths per 100,000 population for males and 98 to 190 for females (based on the range of plausible all-cause mortality estimates) compared with 2008 estimates from the global burden of disease study of 40 (males) and 53 (females) deaths per 100,000 population.DiscussionCertification of death was generally found to be the most reliable data on cause of death in Tonga available for Tonga, with 93% of the final assigned causes following review of the 2008 data matching those listed on the medical certificate of death. Cause of death data available in Tonga can be improved by routinely tabulating data by underlying cause and ensuring contributory causes are not recorded in Part I of the certificate during data entry to the database. There is significantly more data on cause of death available in Tonga than are routinely reported or known to international agencies.

Project description:BackgroundIn Mexico, the vital registration system relies on information collected from death certificates to generate official mortality figures. Although the death certificate has high coverage across the country, there is little information regarding its validity. The objective of this study was to assess the concordance between the underlying cause of death in official statistics obtained from death certificates and a gold standard diagnosis of the same deaths derived from medical records of hospitals.MethodsThe study sample consisted of 1,589 deaths that occurred in 34 public hospitals in the Federal District and the state of Morelos, Mexico in 2009. Neonatal, child, and adult cases were selected for causes of death that included infectious diseases, noncommunicable diseases, and injuries. We compared the underlying cause of death, obtained from medical death certificates, against a gold standard diagnosis derived from a review of medical records developed by the Population Health Metrics Research Consortium. We used chance-corrected concordance and accuracy as metrics to evaluate the quality of performance of the death certificate.ResultsAnalysis considering only the underlying cause of death resulted in a median chance-corrected concordance between the cause of death in medical death certificates versus the gold standard of 54.3% (95% uncertainty interval [UI]: 52.2, 55.6) for neonates, 38.5% (37.0, 40.0) for children, and 66.5% (65.9, 66.9) for adults. The accuracy resulting from the same analysis was 0.756 (0.747, 0.769) for neonates, 0.683 (0.663, 0.701) for children, and 0.780 (0.774, 0.785) for adults. Median chance-corrected concordance and accuracy increased when considering the mention of any cause of death in the death certificate, not just the underlying cause. Concordance varied substantially depending on cause of death, and accuracy varied depending on the true cause-specific mortality fraction composition.ConclusionsAlthough we cannot generalize our conclusions to Mexico as a whole, the results demonstrate important problems with the quality of the main source of information for causes of death used by decision-makers in settings with highly technological vital registration systems. It is necessary to improve death certification procedures, especially in the case of child and neonatal deaths. This requires an important commitment from the health system and health institutions.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Accurate and timely cause of death (COD) data are essential for informed public health policymaking. Medical certification of COD generally provides the majority of COD data in a population and is an essential component of civil registration and vital statistics (CRVS) systems. Accurate completion of the medical certificate of cause of death (MCCOD) should be a relatively straightforward procedure for physicians, but mistakes are common. Here, we present three training strategies implemented in five countries supported by the Bloomberg Philanthropies Data for Health (D4H) Initiative at the University of Melbourne (UoM) and evaluate the impact on the quality of certification. METHODS:The three training strategies evaluated were (1) training of trainers (TOT) in the Philippines, Myanmar, and Sri Lanka; (2) direct training of physicians by the UoM D4H in Papua New Guinea (PNG); and (3) the implementation of an online and basic training strategy in Peru. The evaluation involved an assessment of MCCODs before and after training using an assessment tool developed by the University of Melbourne. RESULTS:The TOT strategy led to reductions in incorrectly completed certificates of between 28% in Sri Lanka and 40% in the Philippines. Following direct training of physicians in PNG, the reduction in incorrectly completed certificates was 30%. In Peru, the reduction in incorrect certificates was 30% after implementation and training on an online system only and 43% after training on both the online system and basic medical certification principles. CONCLUSIONS:The results of this study indicate that a variety of training strategies can produce benefits in the quality of certification, but further improvements are possible. The experiences of D4H suggest several aspects of the strategies that should be further developed to improve outcomes, particularly key stakeholder engagement from early in the intervention and local committees to oversee activities and support an improved culture in hospitals to support better diagnostic skills and practices.

Project description:Accurate and timely data on cause of death are critically important for guiding health programs and policies. Deaths certified by doctors are implicitly considered to be reliable and accurate, yet the quality of information provided in the international Medical Certificate of Cause of Death (MCCD) usually varies according to the personnel involved in certification, the diagnostic capacity of the hospital, and the category of hospitals. There are no published studies that have analysed how certifying doctors in Bangladesh adhere to international rules when completing the MCCD or have assessed the quality of clinical record keeping.The study took place between January 2011 and April 2014 in the Chandpur and Comilla districts of Bangladesh. We introduced the international MCCD to all study hospitals. Trained project physicians assigned an underlying cause of death, assessed the quality of the death certificate, and reported the degree of certainty of the medical records provided for a given cause. We examined the frequency of common errors in completing the MCCD, the leading causes of in-hospital deaths, and the degree of certainty in the cause of death data.The study included 4914 death certificates. 72.9% of medical records were of too poor quality to assign a cause of death, with little difference by age, hospital, and cause of death. 95.6% of death certificates did not indicate the time interval between onset and death, 31.6% required a change in sequence, 13.9% required to include a new diagnosis, 50.7% used abbreviations, 41.5% used multiple causes per line, and 33.2% used an ill-defined condition as the underlying cause of death. 99.1% of death certificates had at least one error. The leading cause of death among adults was stroke (15.8%), among children was pneumonia (31.7%), and among neonates was birth asphyxia (52.8%).Physicians in Bangladeshi hospitals had difficulties in completing the MCCD correctly. Physicians routinely made errors in death certification practices and medical record quality was poor. There is an urgent need to improve death certification practices and the quality of hospital data in Bangladesh if these data are to be useful for policy.

Project description:BackgroundValid cause of death data are essential for health policy formation. The quality of medical certification of cause of death (MCCOD) by physicians directly affects the utility of cause of death data for public policy and hospital management. Whilst training in correct certification has been provided for physicians and medical students, the impact of training is often unknown. This study was conducted to systematically review and meta-analyse the effectiveness of training interventions to improve the quality of MCCOD.MethodsThis review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; Registration ID: CRD42020172547) and followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid EMBASE databases were searched using pre-defined search strategies covering the eligibility criteria. Studies were selected using four screening questions using the Distiller-SR software. Risk of bias assessments were conducted with GRADE recommendations and ROBINS-I criteria for randomised and non-randomised interventions, respectively. Study selection, data extraction and bias assessments were performed independently by two reviewers with a third reviewer to resolve conflicts. Clinical, methodological and statistical heterogeneity assessments were conducted. Meta-analyses were performed with Review Manager 5.4 software using the 'generic inverse variance method' with risk difference as the pooled estimate. A 'summary of findings' table was prepared using the 'GRADEproGDT' online tool. Sensitivity analyses and narrative synthesis of the findings were also performed.ResultsAfter de-duplication, 616 articles were identified and 21 subsequently selected for synthesis of findings; four underwent meta-analysis. The meta-analyses indicated that selected training interventions significantly reduced error rates among participants, with pooled risk differences of 15-33%. Robustness was identified with the sensitivity analyses. The findings of the narrative synthesis were similarly suggestive of favourable outcomes for both physicians and medical trainees.ConclusionsTraining physicians in correct certification improves the accuracy and policy utility of cause of death data. Investment in MCCOD training activities should be considered as a key component of strategies to improve vital registration systems given the potential of such training to substantially improve the quality of cause of death data.

Project description:BackgroundQuality of care is consistently shown to be inadequate in health-care settings in many low-income and middle-income countries, including in private facilities, which are rapidly growing in number but often do not have effective quality stewardship mechanisms. The SafeCare programme aims to address this gap in quality of care, using a standards-based approach adapted to low-resource settings, involving assessments, mentoring, training, and access to loans, to improve clinical quality and facility business performance. We assessed the effect of the SafeCare programme on quality of patient care in faith-based and private for-profit facilities in Tanzania.MethodsIn this cluster-randomised controlled trial, health facilities were eligible if they were dispensaries, health centres, or hospitals in the faith-based or private for-profit sectors in Tanzania. We randomly assigned facilities (1:1) using computer-generated stratified randomisation to receive the full SafeCare package (intervention) or an assessment only (control). Implementing staff and participants were masked to outcome measurement and the primary outcomes were measured by fieldworkers who had no knowledge of the study group allocation. The primary outcomes were health worker compliance with infection prevention and control (IPC) practices as measured by observation of provider-patient interactions, and correct case management of undercover standardised patients at endline (after a minimum of 18 months). Analyses were by modified intention to treat. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN93644888.FindingsBetween March 7 and Nov 30, 2016, we enrolled and randomly assigned 237 health facilities to the intervention (n=118) or control (n=119). Nine facilities (seven intervention facilities and two control facilities) closed during the trial and were not included in the analysis. We observed 29 608 IPC indications in 5425 provider-patient interactions between Feb 7 and April 5, 2018. Health facilities received visits from 909 standardised patients between May 3 and June 12, 2018. Intervention facilities had a 4·4 percentage point (95% CI 0·9-7·7; p=0.015) higher mean SafeCare standards assessment score at endline than control facilities. However, there was no evidence of a difference in clinical quality between intervention and control groups at endline. Compliance with IPC practices was observed in 8181 (56·9%) of 14 366 indications in intervention facilities and 8336 (54·7%) of 15 242 indications in control facilities (absolute difference 2·2 percentage points, 95% CI -0·2 to -4·7; p=0·071). Correct management occurred in 120 (27·0%) of 444 standardised patients in the intervention group and in 136 (29·2%) of 465 in the control group (absolute difference -2·8 percentage points, 95% CI -8·6 to -3·1; p=0·36).InterpretationSafeCare did not improve clinical quality as assessed by compliance with IPC practices and correct case management. The absence of effect on clinical quality could reflect a combination of insufficient intervention intensity, insufficient links between structural quality and care processes, scarcity of resources for quality improvement, and inadequate financial and regulatory incentives for improvement.FundingUK Health Systems Research Initiative (Medical Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council, UK Department for International Development, Global Challenges Research Fund, and Wellcome Trust).

Project description:Background Medical specialty certification exams are high-stakes summative assessments used to determine which doctors have the necessary skills, knowledge, and attitudes to treat patients independently. Such exams are crucial for patient safety, candidates’ career progression and accountability to the public, yet vary significantly among medical specialties and countries. It is therefore of paramount importance that the quality of specialty certification exams is studied in the scientific literature. Methods In this systematic literature review we used the PICOS framework and searched for papers concerning medical specialty certification exams published in English between 2000 and 2020 in seven databases using a diverse set of search term variations. Papers were screened by two researchers independently and scored regarding their methodological quality and relevance to this review. Finally, they were categorized by country, medical specialty and the following seven Ottawa Criteria of good assessment: validity, reliability, equivalence, feasibility, acceptability, catalytic and educational effect. Results After removal of duplicates, 2852 papers were screened for inclusion, of which 66 met all relevant criteria. Over 43 different exams and more than 28 different specialties from 18 jurisdictions were studied. Around 77% of all eligible papers were based in English-speaking countries, with 55% of publications centered on just the UK and USA. General Practice was the most frequently studied specialty among certification exams with the UK General Practice exam having been particularly broadly analyzed. Papers received an average of 4.2/6 points on the quality score. Eligible studies analyzed 2.1/7 Ottawa Criteria on average, with the most frequently studied criteria being reliability, validity, and acceptability. Conclusions The present systematic review shows a growing number of studies analyzing medical specialty certification exams over time, encompassing a wider range of medical specialties, countries, and Ottawa Criteria. Due to their reliance on multiple assessment methods and data-points, aspects of programmatic assessment suggest a promising way forward in the development of medical specialty certification exams which fulfill all seven Ottawa Criteria. Further research is needed to confirm these results, particularly analyses of examinations held outside the Anglosphere as well as studies analyzing entire certification exams or comparing multiple examination methods. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-023-04600-x.

Project description:BackgroundMedical certificates of cause of death (MCCOD) issued by hospital physicians are a key input to vital registration systems. Deaths certified by hospital physicians have been implicitly considered to be of high quality, but recent evidence suggests otherwise. We conducted a medical record review (MRR) of hospital MCCOD in the Philippines and compared the cause of death concordance with certificates coded by the Philippines Statistics Authority (PSA).MethodsMCCOD for adult deaths in Bohol Regional Hospital (BRH) in 2007-2008 and 2011 were collected and reviewed by a team of study physicians. Corresponding MCCOD coded by the PSA were linked by a hospital identifier. The study physicians wrote a new MCCOD using the patient medical record, noted the quality of the medical record to produce a cause of death, and indicated whether it was necessary to change the underlying cause of death (UCOD). Chance-corrected concordance, cause-specific mortality fraction (CSMF) accuracy, and chance-corrected CSMF were used to examine the concordance between the MRR and PSA.ResultsA total of 1052 adult deaths were linked between the MRR and PSA. Median chance-corrected concordance was 0.73, CSMF accuracy was 0.85, and chance-corrected CSMF accuracy was 0.58. 74.8% of medical records were deemed to be of high enough quality to assign a cause of death, yet study physicians indicated that it was necessary to change the UCOD in 41% of deaths, 82% of which required addition of a new UCOD.ConclusionsMedical records were generally of sufficient quality to assign a cause of death and concordance between the PSA and MRR was reasonably high, suggesting that routine mortality statistics data are reasonably accurate for describing population level causes of death in Bohol. While overall agreement between the PSA and MRR in major cause groups was sufficient for public health purposes, improvements in death certification practices are recommended to help physicians differentiate between treatable (immediate) COD and COD that are important for public health surveillance.

Project description:BackgroundCorrect certification of cause of death by physicians (i.e. completing the medical certificate of cause of death or MCCOD) and correct coding according to International Classification of Diseases (ICD) rules are essential to produce quality mortality statistics to inform health policy. Despite clear guidelines, errors in medical certification are common. This study objectively measures the impact of different medical certification errors upon the selection of the underlying cause of death.MethodsA sample of 1592 error-free MCCODs were selected from the 2017 United States multiple cause of death data. The ten most common types of errors in completing the MCCOD (according to published studies) were individually simulated on the error-free MCCODs. After each simulation, the MCCODs were coded using Iris automated mortality coding software. Chance-corrected concordance (CCC) was used to measure the impact of certification errors on the underlying cause of death. Weights for each error type and Socio-demographic Index (SDI) group (representing different mortality conditions) were calculated from the CCC and categorised (very high, high, medium and low) to describe their effect on cause of death accuracy.FindingsThe only very high impact error type was reporting an ill-defined condition as the underlying cause of death. High impact errors were found to be reporting competing causes in Part 1 [of the death certificate] and illegibility, with medium impact errors being reporting underlying cause in Part 2 [of the death certificate], incorrect or absent time intervals and reporting contributory causes in Part 1, and low impact errors comprising multiple causes per line and incorrect sequence. There was only small difference in error importance between SDI groups.ConclusionsReporting an ill-defined condition as the underlying cause of death can seriously affect the coding outcome, while other certification errors were mitigated through the correct application of mortality coding rules. Training of physicians in not reporting ill-defined conditions on the MCCOD and mortality coders in correct coding practices and using Iris should be important components of national strategies to improve cause of death data quality.