RESUMO
Background: Electronic medical records or electronic health records, collectively called electronic records, have significantly transformed the healthcare system and service provision in our world. Despite a number of primary studies on the subject, reports are inconsistent and contradictory about the effects of electronic records on mortality. Therefore, this review examined the effect of electronic records on mortality. Methods: The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses 2020 guideline. Six databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, were searched from February 20 to October 25, 2023. Studies that assessed the effect of electronic records on mortality and were published between 1998 and 2022 were included. Joanna Briggs Institute quality appraisal tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the studies. Narrative synthesis was performed to identify patterns across studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using fixed effect and random-effects models to estimate the pooled effect of electronic records on mortality. Funnel plot and Egger's regression test were used to assess for publication bias. Results: Fifty-four papers were found eligible for the systematic review, of which 42 were included in the meta-analyses. Of the 32 studies that assessed the effect of electronic health record on mortality, eight (25.00%) reported a statistically significant reduction in mortality, 22 (68.75%) did not show a statistically significant difference, and two (6.25%) studies reported an increased risk of mortality. Similarly, among the 22 studies that determined the effect of electronic medical record on mortality, 12 (54.55%) reported a statistically significant reduction in mortality, and ten (45.45%) studies didn't show a statistically significant difference. The fixed effect and random effects on mortality were OR = 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93-0.97) and OR = 0.94 (95% CI: 0.89-0.99), respectively. The associated I-squared was 61.5%. Statistical tests indicated that there was no significant publication bias among the studies included in the meta-analysis. Conclusion: Despite some heterogeneity among the studies, the review indicated that the implementation of electronic records in inpatient, specialized and intensive care units, and primary healthcare facilities seems to result in a statistically significant reduction in mortality. Maturity level and specific features may have played important roles. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42023437257).
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Since 2010, point-of-care (POC) CD4 testing platforms have been introduced in both urban and rural settings to expand access to testing by bringing diagnostic services closer to patients. We conducted an analysis of routinely collected CD4 testing data to determine the invalid result rates associated with POC CD4 testing. METHODS: We analyzed 981,152 CD4 testing records collected from Alere Pima Analyzers between January 2011 and December 2016 across five countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Routinely collected data and programmatic records were used to determine the rate of invalid test results per month, by facility type, and by operator based on cumulative usage during the study period. In addition, frequency of invalid test types and utilization of control beads were assessed. RESULTS: Across the five countries, 75,530 invalid messages were returned, resulting in an overall invalid result rate of 7.7%. The invalid result rate by country ranged from 6.6% to 11.2%. Invalid result rates were consistent across facility types. Invalid result rates were inversely correlated with operator usage: low volume operators (<50 tests over study period) experienced an invalid result rate of 10.2%, while high volume operators (>500 tests over study period) experienced an invalid result rate of 5.5%. Two invalid result types (exposure position control and reagent control) accounted for nearly 50% of invalid results. Routine data showed that control beads were run on 88.3% of days that the device was used. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis found that the rate of invalid results was consistent across all types of health facilities, indicating that decentralization of POC CD4 testing to lower level health facilities did not exhibit high invalid result rates or increase cartridge wastage. Additionally, invalid result rates were inversely correlated to operator usage, with high-volume operators experiencing lower invalid result rates than low-volume operators. POC CD4 testing can, therefore, be performed in decentralized national testing programs; however, adequate training, quality assurance, routine monitoring, and ongoing mentorship should also be implemented for success.
