Is a rheumatic fever register the best surveillance tool to evaluate rheumatic fever control in the Auckland region?

AIM

To determine the most accurate data source for acute rheumatic fever (ARF) epidemiology in the Auckland region.

METHOD

To assess coverage of the Auckland Regional Rheumatic Fever Register (ARRFR), (1998-2010) for children <15 years and resident in Auckland at the time of illness, register, hospitalisation and notification data were compared. A consistent definition was applied to determine definite and probable cases of ARF using clinical records. (www.heartfoundation.org.nz) RESULTS: Of 559 confirmed (definite and probable) RF cases <15 years (median age 10 years), seven were recurrences. Of 552 first episodes, the ARRFR identified 548 (99%), hospitalisations identified 501 (91%) including four not on the register, and public health notifications identified 384 (70%). Of hospitalisation cases, 33% (245/746), and of notifications 20% (94/478) did not meet the case definition and were therefore excluded. Between 1998-2010, eight cases, initially entered as ARF on the ARRFR, were later removed once further clinical detail was available.

CONCLUSION

The ARRFR produced the most accurate information surrounding new cases of ARF (for children <15 years) for the years 1998-2010 in Auckland. This was significantly more accurate than medical officer of health notification and hospitalisation data.