Maternal and neonatal data collection systems in low- and middle-income countries for maternal vaccines active safety surveillance systems: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Most post-licensure vaccine pharmacovigilance in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are passive reporting systems. These have limited utility for maternal immunization pharmacovigilance in LMIC settings and need to be supplemented with active surveillance. Our study's main objective was to identify existing perinatal data collection systems in LMICs that collect individual information on maternal and neonatal health outcomes and could be developed to inform active safety surveillance of novel vaccines for use during pregnancy. METHODS: A scoping review was performed following the Arksey and O'Malley six-stage approach. We included studies describing electronic or mixed paper-electronic data collection systems in LMICs, including research networks, electronic medical records, and custom software platforms for health information systems. Medline PubMed, EMBASE, Global Health, Cochrane Library, LILACS, Bibliography of Asian Studies (BAS), and CINAHL were searched through August 2019. We also searched grey literature including through Google and websites of existing relevant perinatal data collection systems, as well as contacted authors of key studies and experts in the field to validate the information and identify additional sources of relevant unpublished information. RESULTS: A total of 11,817 records were identified. The full texts of 264 records describing 96 data collection systems were assessed for eligibility. Eight perinatal data collection systems met our inclusion criteria: Global Network's Maternal Newborn Health Registry, International Network for the Demographic Evaluation of Populations and their Health; Perinatal Informatic System; Pregnancy Exposure Registry & Birth Defects Surveillance; SmartCare; Open Medical Record System; Open Smart Register Platform and District Health Information Software 2. These selected systems were qualitatively characterized according to seven different domains: governance; system design; system management; data management; data sources, outcomes and data quality. CONCLUSION: This review provides a list of active maternal and neonatal data collection systems in LMICs and their characteristics as well as their outreach, strengths, and limitations. Findings could potentially help further understand where to obtain population-based high-quality information on outcomes to inform the conduct of maternal immunization active vaccine safety surveillance activities and research in LMICs.

Use of an electronic integral monitoring system for patients with diabetes to identify factors associated with an adequate glycemic goal and to measure quality of care.

AIMS: To evaluate the use of the electronic integral monitoring system (SMID) to identify factors associated to glycemic control and its impact in the quality of care in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: T2D patients registered in SMID were analyzed. Biochemical, clinical and lifestyle variables were recorded. Factors associated to HbA1c ≤7% were explored. Quality of care of the clinic was measured according to the National Committee for Quality Assurance Criteria (NCQA) that requires a score of 75 to achieve a good quality of care. RESULTS: 511 patients were included. Prescription of basal insulin, SGLT-2 inhibitors and barriers to follow nutritional plan were associated with decreased probability of having adequate glycemic control. Patients in the maintenance stage of motivation had higher probability of having HbA1c ≤7%. According to NCQA evaluation 60 points were achieved. Glucose goals were not met; 35.9% had HbA1c ≥9% and 17% HbA1c <7%. While foot evaluation, smoking approach, blood pressure and lipids goals were accomplished; eye and renal evaluations were borderline. CONCLUSION: Glycemic control in patients with long standing T2D and multiple comorbidities is challenging, which directly impacts in the quality of care. Professionals should focus in reinforcing non-pharmacological interventions to optimize glycemic targets.

Maternal and neonatal data collection systems in low- and middle-income countries: scoping review protocol.

Background: Pregnant women and neonates represent one of the most vulnerable groups, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). A recent analysis reported that most vaccine pharmacovigilance systems in LMICs consist of spontaneous (passive) adverse event reporting. Thus, LMICs need effective active surveillance approaches, such as pregnancy registries. We intend to identify currently active maternal and neonatal data collection systems in LMICs, with the potential to inform active safety electronic surveillance for novel vaccines using standardized definitions. Methods: A scoping review will be conducted based on established methodology. Multiple databases of indexed and grey literature will be searched with a specific focus on existing electronic and paper-electronic systems in LMICs that collect continuous, prospective, and individual-level data from antenatal care, delivery, neonatal care (up to 28 days), and postpartum (up to 42 days) at the facility and community level, at the national and district level, and at large hospitals. Also, experts will be contacted to identify unpublished information on relevant data collection systems. General and specific descriptions of Health Information Systems (HIS) extracted from the different sources will be combined and duplicated HIS will be removed, producing a list of unique statements. We will present a final list of Maternal, Newborn, and Child Health systems considered flexible enough to be updated with necessary improvements to detect, assess and respond to safety concerns during the introduction of vaccines and other maternal health interventions. Selected experts will participate in an in-person consultation meeting to select up to three systems to be further explored in situ. Results and knowledge gaps will be synthesized after expert consultation.

Collecting Patient Reported Outcomes in the Wild: Opportunities and Challenges.

Collecting Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) is generally seen as an effective way to assess the efficacy and appropriateness of medical interventions, from the patients' perspective. In 2016 the Galeazzi Orthopaedic Institute established a digitized program of PROs collection from spine, hip and knee surgery patients. In this work, we re-port the findings from the data analysis of the responses collected so far about the complementarity of PROs with respect to the data reported by the clinicians, and about the main biases that can undermine their validity and reliability. Although PROs collection is recognized as being far more complex than just asking the patients "how they feel" on a regular basis and it entails costs and devoted electronic platforms, we advocate their further diffusion for the assessment of health technology and clinical procedures.