Suppr超能文献

通过改进常规卫生信息系统(RHIS)加强卫生系统管理。

Routine Health Information System (RHIS) improvements for strengthened health system management.

作者信息

Leon Natalie, Balakrishna Yusentha, Hohlfeld Ameer, Odendaal Willem A, Schmidt Bey-Marrié, Zweigenthal Virginia, Anstey Watkins Jocelyn, Daniels Karen

机构信息

Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa.

School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Aug 13;8(8):CD012012. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012012.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

A well-functioning routine health information system (RHIS) can provide the information needed for health system management, for governance, accountability, planning, policy making, surveillance and quality improvement, but poor information support has been identified as a major obstacle for improving health system management.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions to improve routine health information systems in terms of RHIS performance, and also, in terms of improved health system management performance, and improved patient and population health outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Ovid and Embase Ovid in May 2019. We searched Global Health, Ovid and PsycInfo in April 2016. In January 2020 we searched for grey literature in the Grey Literature Report and in OpenGrey, and for ongoing trials using the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov. In October 2019 we also did a cited reference search using Web of Science, and a 'similar articles' search in PubMed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies and time-series studies comparing routine health information system interventions, with controls, in primary, hospital or community health care settings. Participants included clinical staff and management, district management and community health workers using routine information systems.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently reviewed records to identify studies for inclusion, extracted data from the included studies and assessed the risk of bias. Interventions and outcomes were too varied across studies to allow for pooled risk analysis. We present a 'Summary of findings' table for each intervention comparisons broadly categorised into Technical and Organisational (or a combination), and report outcomes on data quality and service quality. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies: four cluster randomised trials and two controlled before-after studies, from Africa and South America. Three studies evaluated technical interventions, one study evaluated an organisational intervention, and two studies evaluated a combination of technical and organisational interventions. Four studies reported on data quality and six studies reported on service quality. In terms of data quality, a web-based electronic TB laboratory information system probably reduces the length of time to reporting of TB test results, and probably reduces the overall rate of recording errors of TB test results, compared to a paper-based system (moderate certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of the electronic laboratory information system on the recording rate of serious (misidentification) errors for TB test results compared to a paper-based system (very low certainty evidence). Misidentification errors are inaccuracies in transferring test results between an electronic register and patients' clinical charts. We are also uncertain about the effect of the intervention on service quality (timeliness of starting or changing a patient's TB treatment) (very low certainty evidence). A hand-held electronic device probably improves the length of time to report TB test results, and probably reduces the total frequency of recording errors in TB test results between the laboratory notebook and the electronic information record system, compared to a paper-based system (moderate-certainty evidence). We are, however, uncertain about the effect of the intervention on the frequency of serious (misidentification) errors in recording between the laboratory notebook and the electronic information record, compared to a paper-based system (very low certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of a hospital electronic health information system on service quality (length of time outpatients spend at hospital, length of hospital stay, and hospital revenue collection), compared to a paper-based system (very low certainty evidence). High-intensity brief text messaging (SMS) may make little or no difference to data quality (in terms of completeness of documentation of pregnancy outcomes), compared to low-intensity brief text messaging (low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of electronic drug stock notification (with either data management support or product transfer support) on service quality (in terms of transporting stock and stock levels), compared to paper-based stock notification (very low certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of health information strengthening (where it is part of comprehensive service quality improvement intervention) on service quality (health worker motivation, receipt of training by health workers, health information index scores, quality of clinical observation of children and adults) (very low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The review indicates mixed effects of mainly technical interventions to improve data quality, with gaps in evidence on interventions aimed at enhancing data-informed health system management. There is a gap in interventions studying information support beyond clinical management, such as for human resources, finances, drug supply and governance. We need to have a better understanding of the causal mechanisms by which information support may affect change in management decision-making, to inform robust intervention design and evaluation methods.

摘要

背景

一个运行良好的常规卫生信息系统(RHIS)能够提供卫生系统管理、治理、问责、规划、政策制定、监测及质量改进所需的信息,但信息支持不足已被视为改善卫生系统管理的主要障碍。

目的

评估改善常规卫生信息系统的干预措施对RHIS绩效的影响,以及对改善卫生系统管理绩效、患者及人群健康结局的影响。

检索方法

我们于2019年5月检索了Cochrane图书馆中的Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE Ovid和Embase Ovid。于2016年4月检索了Global Health、Ovid和PsycInfo。2020年1月,我们在灰色文献报告和OpenGrey中检索灰色文献,并通过国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)和ClinicalTrials.gov检索正在进行的试验。2019年10月,我们还使用Web of Science进行了引用文献检索,并在PubMed中进行了“相似文章”检索。

入选标准

随机和非随机试验、前后对照研究以及时间序列研究,比较在初级、医院或社区卫生保健环境中对常规卫生信息系统干预措施与对照措施。参与者包括使用常规信息系统的临床工作人员和管理人员、地区管理人员及社区卫生工作者。

数据收集与分析

两位作者独立审查记录以确定纳入研究,从纳入研究中提取数据并评估偏倚风险。各研究间的干预措施和结局差异太大,无法进行汇总风险分析。我们为每种干预措施比较呈现一个“结果总结”表,大致分为技术和组织(或两者结合)两类,并报告数据质量和服务质量方面的结局。我们采用GRADE方法评估证据的确定性。

主要结果

我们纳入了六项研究:四项整群随机试验和两项前后对照研究,来自非洲和南美洲。三项研究评估了技术干预措施,一项研究评估了组织干预措施,两项研究评估了技术和组织干预措施的组合。四项研究报告了数据质量,六项研究报告了服务质量。在数据质量方面,与纸质系统相比,基于网络的电子结核病实验室信息系统可能会缩短结核病检测结果报告时间,并可能降低结核病检测结果记录错误的总体发生率(中等确定性证据)。与纸质系统相比,我们不确定电子实验室信息系统对结核病检测结果严重(错误识别)错误记录率的影响(非常低确定性证据)。错误识别错误是指在电子登记册和患者临床病历之间传输检测结果时出现的不准确情况。我们也不确定该干预措施对服务质量(开始或更改患者结核病治疗的及时性)的影响(非常低确定性证据)。与纸质系统相比,手持电子设备可能会缩短结核病检测结果报告时间,并可能降低实验室笔记本与电子信息记录系统之间结核病检测结果记录错误的总频率(中等确定性证据)。然而,与纸质系统相比,我们不确定该干预措施对实验室笔记本与电子信息记录之间严重(错误识别)错误记录频率的影响(非常低确定性证据)。与纸质系统相比,我们不确定医院电子健康信息系统对服务质量(门诊患者在医院停留时间、住院时间和医院收入收取)的影响(非常低确定性证据)。与低强度简短短信相比,高强度简短短信(SMS)对数据质量(就妊娠结局记录完整性而言)可能几乎没有影响或没有影响(低确定性证据)。与纸质库存通知相比,我们不确定电子药品库存通知(有数据管理支持或产品转移支持)对服务质量(在运输库存和库存水平方面)的影响(非常低确定性证据)。我们不确定卫生信息强化(作为全面服务质量改进干预措施的一部分)对服务质量(卫生工作者积极性、卫生工作者接受培训情况、卫生信息指数得分、儿童和成人临床观察质量)的影响(非常低确定性证据)。

作者结论

该综述表明,主要技术干预措施对改善数据质量的效果不一,在旨在加强基于数据的卫生系统管理的干预措施方面证据存在差距。在研究临床管理之外的信息支持方面存在差距,例如人力资源、财务、药品供应和治理方面。我们需要更好地理解信息支持可能影响管理决策变化的因果机制,以为有力的干预设计和评估方法提供信息。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/92db/8094584/712f5ff8ec6e/nCD012012-FIG-01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验