Quality of care for children with acute respiratory infections in health facilities: a comparative analysis of assessment tools.

Background: Severe childhood pneumonia requires treatment in hospital by trained health care workers. It is therefore important to determine if health facilities provide quality health services for children with acute respiratory infections (ARI), including pneumonia. Using established indicators from WHO to measure quality of care (QoC) as a reference standard, this review aims to evaluate how well existing tools assess QoC for children presenting to health facilities with ARI. Methods: Existing assessment tools identified from a published systematic literature review that evaluated QoC assessment tools for children (<15 years) in health facilities for all health conditions were included in this ARI-specific review. 27 ARI-specific indicators or "quality measures" from the WHO "Standards for improving quality of care for children and young adolescents in health facilities" were selected for use as a reference standard to assess QoC for children presenting to health facilities with ARI symptoms. Each included assessment tool was evaluated independently by two paediatricians to determine how many of the WHO ARI quality measures were assessable by the tool. The assessment tools were then ranked in order of percentage of ARI quality measures assessable. Results: Nine assessment tools that assessed QoC for children attending health facilities were included. Two hospital care tools developed by WHO had the most consistency with ARI-specific indicators, assessing 22/27 (81.5%) and 20/27 (74.1%) of the quality measures. The remaining tools were less consistent with the ARI-specific indicators, including between zero to 16 of the 27 quality measures. The most common indicators absent from the tools were assessment of appropriate use of pulse oximetry and administration of oxygen, how often oxygen supply was unavailable, and mortality rates. Conclusions: The existing WHO hospital-based QoC assessment tools are comprehensive but could be enhanced by improved data quality around oxygen availability and appropriate use of pulse oximetry and oxygen administration. Any tools, however, should be considered within broader assessments of QoC, rather than utilised in isolation. Further adaptation to local settings will improve feasibility and facilitate progress in the delivery of quality health care for children with ARI. Registration: The protocol of the original systematic review was registered in PROSPERO ID: CRD42020175652.

Assessing the quality of care for children attending health facilities: a systematic review of assessment tools.

INTRODUCTION: Assessing quality of healthcare is integral in determining progress towards equitable health outcomes worldwide. Using the WHO 'Standards for improving quality of care for children and young adolescents in health facilities' as a reference standard, we aimed to evaluate existing tools that assess quality of care for children. METHODS: We undertook a systematic literature review of publications/reports between 2008 and 2020 that reported use of quality of care assessment tools for children (<15 years) in health facilities. Identified tools were reviewed against the 40 quality statements and 510 quality measures from the WHO Standards to determine the extent each tool was consistent with the WHO Standards. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO ID: CRD42020175652. RESULTS: Nine assessment tools met inclusion criteria. Two hospital care tools developed by WHO-Europe and WHO-South-East Asia Offices had the most consistency with the WHO Standards, assessing 291 (57·1%) and 208 (40·8%) of the 510 quality measures, respectively. Remaining tools included between 33 (6·5%) and 206 (40·4%) of the 510 quality measures. The WHO-Europe tool was the only tool to assess all 40 quality statements. The most common quality measures absent were related to experience of care, particularly provision of educational, emotional and psychosocial support to children and families, and fulfilment of children's rights during care. CONCLUSION: Quality of care assessment tools for children in health facilities are missing some key elements highlighted by the WHO Standards. The WHO Standards are, however, extensive and applying all the quality measures in every setting may not be feasible. A consensus of key indicators to monitor the WHO Standards is required. Existing tools could be modified to include priority indicators to strengthen progress reporting towards delivering quality health services for children. In doing so, a balance between comprehensiveness and practical utility is needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020175652.

Cause-specific neonatal morbidity and mortality in the Solomon Islands: An assessment of data from four hospitals over a three-year period.

AIM: Data on stillbirths and neonatal morbidity and mortality in low-middle income Pacific Island Nations such as Solomon Islands is limited, partly due to weak health information systems. We describe the perinatal mortality and clinical factors associated with poor newborn outcomes at four hospitals in Solomon Islands. METHODS: This was a registry based retrospective cohort study at three provincial hospitals and the National Referral Hospital (NRH) from 2014-2016 inclusive. RESULTS: 23 966 labour ward births and 3148 special care nursery (SCN) admissions were reviewed. Overall still birth rate was 29.2/1000 births and the perinatal mortality rate was 35.9/1000 births. PNMR were higher in provincial hospitals (46.2, 44.0 and 34.3/1000) than at NRH (33.3/1000). The commonest reasons for admission to SCN across the hospitals were sepsis, complications of prematurity and birth asphyxia. SCN mortality rates were higher in the 3 provincial hospitals than at NRH (15.9% (95/598) vs. 7.9% (202/2550), P value <0.01). At NRH, the conditions with the highest case fatality rates were birth asphyxia (21.3%), congenital abnormalities (17.7%), and prematurity (15.1%). Up to 11% of neonates did not have a diagnosis recorded. CONCLUSIONS: The perinatal mortality rates are high and intrapartum complications, prematurity and sepsis are the main causes of morbidity and mortality for neonates at hospitals in Solomon Islands. Stillbirths account for 81% of perinatal deaths. These results are useful for planning for quality improvement at provincial level. Improved vital registration systems are required to better capture stillbirths and neonatal outcomes.

Assessment of the quality of neonatal care in the Solomon Islands.

AIM: To identify strengths and obstacles for improving the quality of newborn care in the Solomon Islands. Improving the quality of newborn care is a priority in the Sustainable Development Goals and the Action Plan for Healthy Newborns in the Western Pacific. The neonatal mortality rate in the Solomon Islands, a lower-middle-income country, has improved slower than overall child mortality. In 2013, neonatal mortality (13.2/1000) constituted 44% of under-5 deaths (30.1/1000). METHODS: A cross-sectional study of newborn care in five provincial hospitals using a World Health Organization assessment tool for hospital quality of care. Twelve months of neonatal records of the National Referral Hospital (NRH) labour ward and nursery were audited. RESULTS: Essential medications and basic equipment were generally available. Challenges included workforce shortages and lack of expertise, high costs, organisation and maintenance of equipment, infection control and high rates of stillbirth. Over 12 months at the NRH labour ward, there were 5412 live births, 65 (1.2%) 'fresh' stillbirths and 96 (1.8%) 'macerated' stillbirths. Over the same period, there were an associated 779 nursery admissions, and the main causes of mortality were complications of prematurity, birth asphyxia, congenital abnormalities and sepsis. Total neonatal mortality at NRH was 16 per 1000 live births, and 77% of deaths occurred in the first 3 days of life. CONCLUSIONS: Infrastructure limitations, technical maintenance and equipment organisation were obstacles to newborn care. Greater health-care worker knowledge and skills for early essential newborn care, infection control and management of newborn complications is needed.