A systematic review of portable electronic technology for health education in resource-limited settings.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to conduct a systematic review of the literature of how portable electronic technologies with offline functionality are perceived and used to provide health education in resource-limited settings. METHODS: Three reviewers evaluated articles and performed a bibliography search to identify studies describing health education delivered by portable electronic device with offline functionality in low- or middle-income countries. Data extracted included: study population; study design and type of analysis; type of technology used; method of use; setting of technology use; impact on caregivers, patients, or overall health outcomes; and reported limitations. RESULTS: Searches yielded 5514 unique titles. Out of 75 critically reviewed full-text articles, 10 met inclusion criteria. Study locations included Botswana, Peru, Kenya, Thailand, Nigeria, India, Ghana, and Tanzania. Topics addressed included: development of healthcare worker training modules, clinical decision support tools, patient education tools, perceptions and usability of portable electronic technology, and comparisons of technologies and/or mobile applications. Studies primarily looked at the assessment of developed educational modules on trainee health knowledge, perceptions and usability of technology, and comparisons of technologies. Overall, studies reported positive results for portable electronic device-based health education, frequently reporting increased provider/patient knowledge, improved patient outcomes in both quality of care and management, increased provider comfort level with technology, and an environment characterized by increased levels of technology-based, informal learning situations. Negative assessments included high investment costs, lack of technical support, and fear of device theft. CONCLUSIONS: While the research is limited, portable electronic educational resources present promising avenues to increase access to effective health education in resource-limited settings, contingent on the development of culturally adapted and functional materials to be used on such devices.

Mortality and losses to follow-up among adolescents living with HIV in the IeDEA global cohort collaboration.

INTRODUCTION: We assessed mortality and losses to follow-up (LTFU) during adolescence in routine care settings in the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) consortium. METHODS: Cohorts in the Asia-Pacific, the Caribbean, Central, and South America, and sub-Saharan Africa (Central, East, Southern, West) contributed data, and included adolescents living with HIV (ALHIV) enrolled from January 2003 and aged 10 to 19 years (period of adolescence) while under care up to database closure (June 2016). Follow-up started at age 10 years or the first clinic visit, whichever was later. Entering care at <15 years was a proxy for perinatal infection, while entering care ≥15 years represented infection acquired during adolescence. Competing risk regression was used to assess associations with death and LTFU among those ever receiving triple-drug antiretroviral therapy (triple-ART). RESULTS: Of the 61,242 ALHIV from 270 clinics in 34 countries included in the analysis, 69% (n = 42,138) entered care <15 years of age (53% female), and 31% (n = 19,104) entered care ≥15 years (81% female). During adolescence, 3.9% died, 30% were LTFU and 8.1% were transferred. For those with infection acquired perinatally versus during adolescence, the four-year cumulative incidences of mortality were 3.9% versus 5.4% and of LTFU were 26% versus 69% respectively (both p < 0.001). Overall, there were higher hazards of death for females (adjusted sub-hazard ratio (asHR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.33), and those starting treatment at ≥5 years of age (highest asHR for age ≥15: 8.72, 95% CI 5.85 to 13.02), and in care in mostly urban (asHR 1.40, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.75) and mostly rural settings (asHR 1.39, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.87) compared to urban settings. Overall, higher hazards of LTFU were observed among females (asHR 1.12, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.17), and those starting treatment at age ≥5 years (highest asHR for age ≥15: 11.11, 95% CI 9.86 to 12.53), in care at district hospitals (asHR 1.27, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.37) or in rural settings (asHR 1.21, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.29), and starting triple-ART after 2006 (highest asHR for 2011 to 2016 1.84, 95% CI 1.71 to 1.99). CONCLUSIONS: Both mortality and LTFU were worse among those entering care at ≥15 years. ALHIV should be evaluated apart from younger children and adults to identify population-specific reasons for death and LTFU.

Compliance with guidelines for ADHD: a pilot study of an evaluation tool.

The investigators developed a 1-page chart abstraction tool to evaluate compliance with practice guidelines for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. The tool had strong inter-rater reliability, with kappa of 0.81. Pilot testing for 57 children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder showed only 12% documented full compliance with assessment guidelines and 44% with treatment guidelines.