| Literature DB >> 32602644 |
Euphemia L Sibanda1,2, Karen Webb3,4, Carolyn A Fahey5, Mi-Suk Kang Dufour5, Sandra I McCoy5, Constancia Watadzaushe1, Jeffrey Dirawo1, Marsha Deda3, Anesu Chimwaza6, Isaac Taramusi7, Angela Mushavi6, Solomon Mukungunugwa6, Nancy Padian5, Frances M Cowan1,2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Despite improvements in prevention of mother-to-child transmission (PMTCT) of HIV outcomes, there remain unacceptably high numbers of mother-to-child transmissions (MTCT) of HIV. Programmes and research collect multiple sources of PMTCT data, yet this data is rarely integrated in a systematic way. We conducted a data integration exercise to evaluate the Zimbabwe national PMTCT programme and derive lessons for strengthening implementation and documentation.Entities:
Keywords: HIV; PMTCT; PMTCT cascade; data integration; data layering; data triangulation; prevention cascade
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32602644 PMCID: PMC7325515 DOI: 10.1002/jia2.25524
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Int AIDS Soc ISSN: 1758-2652 Impact factor: 5.396
Figure 1Data sources and domains.DHIS2, District Health Information System 2; MOHCC, Ministry of Health and Child Care; PMTCT, prevention of mother‐to‐child transmission.
Data sources and attributes for the integration exercise
| Research | Programme | Modelling | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PMTCT survey | DHIS2 | PEPFAR DATIM | MB Pair register | Case investigation forms | Spectrum | |
| Population | Representative, population level MB pairs 9‐18 and 19‐36 months | Attendees of health facilities | Attendees of health facilities | Attendees of health facilities | MB pairs where MTCT is recorded | |
| # Records (N) |
2018: 7709 MB 9‐18 months; 1221 MB 19‐36 months 2012: 8800 2014: 10,404 | 448,475 women registered in ANC | 177,706 women registered in ANC | Aggregate MB pair patient entries not documented | 271 newly diagnosed infant‐HIV positive MB pairs | |
| Period covered | 2017‐2018 | 2018‐2019 | 2018‐2019 | 2018‐2019 | January 2018‐September 2019 | |
| Data collection method | Population based survey in catchment areas of health facilities | Collation of data originally recorded on programme forms | Collation of data originally recorded on programme forms | Register completed longitudinally for each MB pair | Forms completed for each MTCT that is recorded | |
| Data type | Individual level | Aggregate at the facility level | Aggregate at the facility level | Individual level | Individual level | Population level |
| Geographical coverage | Catchment areas of 5 of 10 Zimbabwean provinces | National | 669 health facilities in 24 districts | 36 districts | 669 health facilities in 6 Provinces | National estimate |
| Strengths |
Robust data collection and cleaning Inclusion of MB pairs not currently in care (including if either M or B have died) Population‐representative estimates |
National‐level data Objective data reporting using programme forms Monthly reporting for continuous performance monitoring Outcomes verifiable with source documents |
Monthly reporting for continuous performance monitoring (support for rapid course correction) Outcomes verifiable with source documents | Longitudinal follow‐up of MB pairs | Detailed investigation of each MTCT | Population level impacts and outcomes |
| Weaknesses |
Some outcomes are self‐reported Expensive Does not facilitate real‐time quality improvement |
Aggregate cross sectional data Limited resources to validate/clean the data | Aggregate data | Paper registers with incomplete abstraction to electronic format | Incomplete data and low coverage (completed and entered form for each laboratory diagnosis) | Informed by programme data which may not be accurate/complete |
| Summary of data quality assessment | Good | Fair | Fair | Poor | Good | Fair |
ANC, antenatal care; DHIS2, District Health Information System 2; MB, mother‐baby; MCTC, mother‐to‐child transmission; MOHCC, Ministry of Health and Child Care; PEPFAR/DATIM, President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief/Data Accountability Transparency and Impact Measurement; PMTCT. prevention of mother‐to‐child transmission.
Figure 2Cascade for (a) HIV‐positive women; (b) HIV‐exposed infants; (c) HIV‐negative women.ANC, antenatal care; ART, antiretroviral therapy; DHIS2, District Health Information System 2; MOHCC, Ministry of Health and Child Care; PEPFAR/DATIM, President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief/Data Accountability Transparency and Impact Measurement; PMTCT, prevention of mother to child transmission.
Figure 3Spatial representation of MTCT across the country.MOHCC, Ministry of Health and Child Care; MTCT, mother‐to‐child transmission.
Univariable analysis of factors associated with MTCT in 2018 survey
| Factor | Number (%) MTCT | Odds ratio (95% confidence interval) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Timing of ANC registration/month | – | 1.20 (0.96‐1.52) | 0.11 |
| Partner accompaniment to ANC | |||
| No | 14 (5.45) | 1 | 0.01 |
| Yes | 3 (1.30) | 0.23 (0.065‐0.81) | |
| No partner | 1 (25.00) | 5.79 (0.56‐59.25) | |
| HIV status before pregnancy | |||
| Negative | 14 (6.6) | 1 | 0.01 |
| Positive | 7 (2.1) | 0.32 (0.13‐0.81) | |
| Baby received ARV prophylaxis | |||
| No | 14 (7.9) | 1 | 0.003 |
| Yes | 11 (2.4) | 0.29 (0.13‐0.65) | |
| Received care at more than one facility | |||
| No (one facility) | 11 (2.6) | 1 | 0.03 |
| Yes | 12 (6.5) | 2.55 (1.10‐5.89) | |
ANC, antenatal care; ARV, antiretroviral; MTCT, mother‐to‐child transmission.
Descriptive analysis among case investigation form respondents (N = 271 HIV‐positive infants)
| Factor | Number (%) or parameter |
|---|---|
| Timing of ANC registration/month | Median 23.5 weeks/5.4 months (N = 96) |
| Male partner HIV status | |
| Negative | 20 (7.4) |
| Positive | 104 (38.4) |
| Unknown | 109 (40.2) |
| Not Documented | 37 (13.7) |
| HIV status before pregnancy | |
| Negative | 143 (52.7) |
| Positive | 81 (29.9) |
| Not documented | 47 (17.3) |
| Baby received ARV prophylaxis | |
| No | 67 (24.7) |
| Yes | 166 (61.2) |
| Not documented | 38 (14.0) |
| Received care at more than one facility | 48/219 (21.9) ‐ maternal mobility noted in free text comments |
ANC, antenatal care; ARV, antiretroviral.
Figure 4Modelling of MTCT rate by source.
ART, antiretroviral therapy; MTCT, mother to child transmission.
Figure 5Process of data integration and summary of findings and resulting intervention.PMTCT, prevention of mother‐to‐child transmission.
Figure 6Expanded PMTCT Cascade to include the prevention cascade among HIV‐Negative Women.*Hamilton
Stage 2: template for assessing data quality – adapted from Kahn et al. [26]
| Data Source | Category | Sub category | Verification checks | Validation checks | Comments and overall assessment of quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Data source (complete for each data source) |
Do data values adhere to specified standards and formats? |
Value conformance (i) whether data values conform to internal formatting constraints or (ii) whether they conform to allowable values or ranges Relational conformance (i) whether data values conform to relational constraints; (ii) key unique data are not duplicated Computational conformance – computed values conform to computational/programming specifications | |||
|
Are data values present? | |||||
|
Are data values believable? |
Uniqueness plausibility – data values that identify a single object are not duplicated Atemporal plausibility – agreement with internal measurement or local knowledge, independent measures of the same fact are in agreement; repeated measures of the same fact show the expected variability Temporal plausibility – conformance to expected temporal properties | ||||
|
Are the data relevant to current programme practice – scale, recency |