Comparison of paediatric infectious disease deaths in public sector health facilities using different data sources in the Western Cape, South Africa (2007–2021)

K. Kehoe*, E. Morden, T. Jacobs, N. Zinyakatira, M. Smith, A. Heekes, J. Murray, D. M. le Roux, T. Wessels, M. Richards, B. Eley, H. E. Jones, M. T. Redaniel, M. A. Davies

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)
15 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Routinely collected population-wide health data are often used to understand mortality trends including child mortality, as these data are often available more readily or quickly and for lower geographic levels than population-wide mortality data. However, understanding the completeness and accuracy of routine health data sources is essential for their appropriate interpretation and use. This study aims to assess the accuracy of diagnostic coding for public sector in-facility childhood (age < 5 years) infectious disease deaths (lower respiratory tract infections [LRTI], diarrhoea, meningitis, and tuberculous meningitis [TBM]) in routine hospital information systems (RHIS) through comparison with causes of death identified in a child death audit system (Child Healthcare Problem Identification Programme [Child PIP]) and the vital registration system (Death Notification [DN] Surveillance) in the Western Cape, South Africa and to calculate admission mortality rates (number of deaths in admitted patients per 1000 live births) using the best available data from all sources. Methods: The three data sources: RHIS, Child PIP, and DN Surveillance are integrated and linked by the Western Cape Provincial Health Data Centre using a unique patient identifier. We calculated the deduplicated total number of infectious disease deaths and estimated admission mortality rates using all three data sources. We determined the completeness of Child PIP and DN Surveillance in identifying deaths recorded in RHIS and the level of agreement for causes of death between data sources. Results: Completeness of recorded in-facility infectious disease deaths in Child PIP (23/05/2007–08/02/2021) and DN Surveillance (2010–2013) was 70% and 69% respectively. The greatest agreement in infectious causes of death were for diarrhoea and LRTI: 92% and 84% respectively between RHIS and Child PIP, and 98% and 83% respectively between RHIS and DN Surveillance. In-facility infectious disease admission mortality rates decreased significantly for the province: 1.60 (95% CI: 1.37–1.85) to 0.73 (95% CI: 0.56–0.93) deaths per 1000 live births from 2007 to 2020. Conclusion: RHIS had accurate causes of death amongst children dying from infectious diseases, particularly for diarrhoea and LRTI, with declining in-facility admission mortality rates over time. We recommend integrating data sources to ensure the most accurate assessment of child deaths.

Original languageEnglish
Article number104
JournalBMC Infectious Diseases
Volume23
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 22 Feb 2023

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
We acknowledge funding for the Western Cape Provincial Health Data Centre from the Western Cape Department of Health, the US National Institutes for Health (R01 HD080465, U01 AI069924), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (1164272, 1191327), the United States Agency for International Development (72067418CA00023), and the Wellcome Trust (203135/Z/16/Z).

Funding Information:
The authors acknowledge the children included in this study, their clinicians and service providers. We thank the Western Cape Provincial Health Data Centre for their assistance.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, The Author(s).

Keywords

  • Data comparison
  • Data completeness
  • Paediatric infectious disease deaths
  • South Africa

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of paediatric infectious disease deaths in public sector health facilities using different data sources in the Western Cape, South Africa (2007–2021)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this