Improving health information systems during an emergency: lessons and recommendations from an Ebola treatment centre in Sierra Leone.

BACKGROUND: The 2014-2016 West Africa Ebola epidemic highlighted the difficulty of collecting patient information during emergencies, especially in highly infectious environments. Health information systems (HISs) appropriate for such settings were lacking prior to this outbreak. Here we describe our development and implementation of paper and electronic HISs at the Sierra Leone Kerry Town Ebola treatment centre (ETC) from 2014 to 2015. We share our approach, experiences, and recommendations for future health emergencies. METHODS: We developed eight fact-finding questions about data-related needs, priorities, and restrictions at the ETC ("inputs") to inform eight structural decisions ("outputs") across six core HIS components. Semi-structured interviews about the "inputs" were then conducted with HIS stakeholders, chosen based on their teams' involvement in ETC HIS-related activities. Their responses were used to formulate the "output" results to guide the HIS design. We implemented the HIS using an Agile approach, monitored system usage, and developed a structured questionnaire on user experiences and opinions. RESULTS: Some key "input" responses were: 1) data needs for priorities (patient care, mandatory reporting); 2) challenges around infection control, limited equipment, and staff clinical/language proficiencies; 3) patient/clinical flows; and 4) weak points from staff turnover, infection control, and changing protocols. Key outputs included: 1) determining essential data, 2) data tool design decisions (e.g. large font sizes, checkboxes/buttons), 3) data communication methods (e.g. radio, "collective memory"), 4) error reduction methods (e.g. check digits, pre-written wristbands), and 5) data storage options (e.g. encrypted files, accessible folders). Implementation involved building data collection tools (e.g. 13 forms), preparing the systems (e.g. supplies), training staff, and maintenance (e.g. removing old forms). Most patients had basic (100%, n = 456/456), drug (96.9%, n = 442/456), and additional clinical/epidemiological (98.9%, n = 451/456) data stored. The questionnaire responses highlighted the importance of usability and simplicity in the HIS. CONCLUSIONS: HISs during emergencies are often ad-hoc and disjointed, but systematic design and implementation can lead to high-quality systems focused on efficiency and ease of use. Many of the processes used and lessons learned from our work are generalizable to other health emergencies. Improvements should be started now to have rapidly adaptable and deployable HISs ready for the next health emergency.

Symptom- and Laboratory-Based Ebola Risk Scores to Differentiate Likely Ebola Infections.

Rapidly identifying likely Ebola patients is difficult because of a broad case definition, overlap of symptoms with common illnesses, and lack of rapid diagnostics. However, rapid identification is critical for care and containment of contagion. We analyzed retrospective data from 252 Ebola-positive and 172 Ebola-negative patients at a Sierra Leone Ebola treatment center to develop easy-to-use risk scores, based on symptoms and laboratory tests (if available), to stratify triaged patients by their likelihood of having Ebola infection. Headache, diarrhea, difficulty breathing, nausea/vomiting, loss of appetite, and conjunctivitis comprised the symptom-based score. The laboratory-based score also included creatinine, creatine kinase, alanine aminotransferase, and total bilirubin. This risk score correctly identified 92% of Ebola-positive patients as high risk for infection; both scores correctly classified >70% of Ebola-negative patients as low or medium risk. Clinicians can use these risk scores to gauge the likelihood of triaged patients having Ebola while awaiting laboratory confirmation.

Surviving Ebola: A historical cohort study of Ebola mortality and survival in Sierra Leone 2014-2015.

BACKGROUND: While a number of predictors for Ebola mortality have been identified, less is known about post-viral symptoms. The identification of acute-illness predictors for post-viral symptoms could allow the selection of patients for more active follow up in the future, and those in whom early interventions may be beneficial in the long term. Studying predictors of both mortality and post-viral symptoms within a single cohort of patients could also further our understanding of the pathophysiology of survivor sequelae. METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We performed a historical cohort study using data collected as part of routine clinical care from an Ebola Treatment Centre (ETC) in Kerry Town, Sierra Leone, in order to identify predictors of mortality and of post-viral symptoms. Variables included as potential predictors were sex, age, date of admission, first recorded viral load at the ETC and symptoms (recorded upon presentation at the ETC). Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors. Of 263 Ebola-confirmed patients admitted between November 2014 and March 2015, 151 (57%) survived to ETC discharge. Viral load was the strongest predictor of mortality (adjusted OR comparing high with low viral load: 84.97, 95% CI 30.87-345.94). We did not find evidence that a high viral load predicted post-viral symptoms (ocular: 1.17, 95% CI 0.35-3.97; musculoskeletal: 1.07, 95% CI 0.28-4.08). Ocular post-viral symptoms were more common in females (2.31, 95% CI 0.98-5.43) and in those who had experienced hiccups during the acute phase (4.73, 95% CI 0.90-24.73). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: These findings may add epidemiological support to the hypothesis that post-viral symptoms have an immune-mediated aspect and may not only be a consequence of high viral load and disease severity.