Melissa Bauserman1, Claire Hailey2, Justin Gado3, Adrien Lokangaka3, Jessica Williams4, Rebecca Richards-Kortum4, Antoinette Tshefu3, Carl Bose2. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA Department of Nutrition, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA melissa_bauserman@med.unc.edu. 2. Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA. 3. Kinshasa School of Public Health, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo. 4. Institute for Global Health Technologies, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health centers in low-income countries often depend on donations to provide appropriate diagnostic equipment. However, donations are sometimes made without an understanding of the recipient's needs, practical constraints or sustainability of supplies. METHODS: We donated a set of physical diagnostic equipment, non-invasive instrument tests and laboratory supplies to a rural health center in the Democratic Republic of Congo. We collected information on the usage and durability of equipment and supplies for each patient encounter over a 1-year period. RESULTS: We recorded 913 patient encounters. The most commonly used physical diagnostic equipment were the stethoscope (98.9%; 903/913), thermometer (81.7%; 746/913), adult scale (81.4%; 744/913), stop watch (62.6%; 572/913), adult sphygmomanometer (55.8%; 510/913), infant scale (24.9%; 228/913), measuring tape (24.3%; 222/913) and fetoscope (23.8%; 218/913). The most commonly used laboratory tests were the blood smear for malaria (53.7%; 491/913), hematocrit (23.5%; 215/913), urinalysis (20.1%; 184/913) and sputum stain for TB (13.3%; 122/913). With the exception of a penlight and solar lantern, all equipment remained functional. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds valuable information about the utility and durability of equipment supplied to a health center in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Our results might aid in determining the appropriateness of donated medical equipment in similar settings. The selection of donated goods should be made with knowledge of the context in which it will be used, and utilization should be monitored.
BACKGROUND: Health centers in low-income countries often depend on donations to provide appropriate diagnostic equipment. However, donations are sometimes made without an understanding of the recipient's needs, practical constraints or sustainability of supplies. METHODS: We donated a set of physical diagnostic equipment, non-invasive instrument tests and laboratory supplies to a rural health center in the Democratic Republic of Congo. We collected information on the usage and durability of equipment and supplies for each patient encounter over a 1-year period. RESULTS: We recorded 913 patient encounters. The most commonly used physical diagnostic equipment were the stethoscope (98.9%; 903/913), thermometer (81.7%; 746/913), adult scale (81.4%; 744/913), stop watch (62.6%; 572/913), adult sphygmomanometer (55.8%; 510/913), infant scale (24.9%; 228/913), measuring tape (24.3%; 222/913) and fetoscope (23.8%; 218/913). The most commonly used laboratory tests were the blood smear for malaria (53.7%; 491/913), hematocrit (23.5%; 215/913), urinalysis (20.1%; 184/913) and sputum stain for TB (13.3%; 122/913). With the exception of a penlight and solar lantern, all equipment remained functional. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds valuable information about the utility and durability of equipment supplied to a health center in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Our results might aid in determining the appropriateness of donated medical equipment in similar settings. The selection of donated goods should be made with knowledge of the context in which it will be used, and utilization should be monitored.
Authors: Peter Howitt; Ara Darzi; Guang-Zhong Yang; Hutan Ashrafian; Rifat Atun; James Barlow; Alex Blakemore; Anthony M J Bull; Josip Car; Lesong Conteh; Graham S Cooke; Nathan Ford; Simon A J Gregson; Karen Kerr; Dominic King; Myutan Kulendran; Robert A Malkin; Azeem Majeed; Stephen Matlin; Robert Merrifield; Hugh A Penfold; Steven D Reid; Peter C Smith; Molly M Stevens; Michael R Templeton; Charles Vincent; Elizabeth Wilson Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-08-01 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Stuart S Olmsted; Melinda Moore; Robin C Meili; Herbert C Duber; Jeffrey Wasserman; Preethi Sama; Ben Mundell; Lee H Hilborne Journal: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 2.493
Authors: Andrew R Miller; Gregory L Davis; Z Maria Oden; Mohamad Reza Razavi; Abolfazl Fateh; Morteza Ghazanfari; Farid Abdolrahimi; Shahin Poorazar; Fatemeh Sakhaie; Randall J Olsen; Ahmad Reza Bahrmand; Mark C Pierce; Edward A Graviss; Rebecca Richards-Kortum Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-08-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jocelyn Brown; Lauren Theis; Lila Kerr; Nazima Zakhidova; Kelly O'Connor; Margaret Uthman; Z Maria Oden; Rebecca Richards-Kortum Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Annelies W Mesman; Musa Bangura; Sahr M Kanawa; Joseph S Gassimu; Kerry L Dierberg; Mohamed M Sheku; J Daniel Orozco; Regan H Marsh Journal: Afr J Lab Med Date: 2019-10-22