Author:
Venkateswaran Mahima,Pervin Jesmin,Dolphyne Akuba,Friberg Ingrid K.,Fjeldheim Ingvild,Frøen J. Frederik,Khatun Fatema,O’Donnell Brian,Rahman Monjur,Rahman A. M. Quaiyum,Nu U Tin,Rose Christopher James,Sarker Bidhan Krishna,Rahman Anisur
Abstract
Abstract
Introduction
Longitudinal client tracking systems with digital health interventions are recommended for implementation in resource-limited settings but lack evidence of benefits, harms, and implementation. In the eRegMat cluster-randomized controlled trial, we aimed to assess the effectiveness of an eRegistry versus an unshared digital client record.
Methods
Fifty-nine primary health care facilities in Matlab, Bangladesh were randomized with a 1:1 allocation ratio to receive an eRegistry (intervention, 30 health facilities) with decision support, feedback dashboards and targeted client communication, or an unshared digital client record without digital health interventions (control, 29 health facilities). We assessed timely antenatal care attendance, quality of care, and health outcomes. Outcome data were captured in the eRegistry, or unshared digital client record used by health workers, and through a postpartum household survey. We estimated adjusted relative risks (ARRs) following the intention-to-treat principle and adjusted for cluster randomization.
Results
From October 2018 to June 2020, 3023 pregnant women were enrolled in the intervention and 2746 in the control groups through community and facility registrations. Intervention and control groups did not differ for the primary outcomes: timely attendance at eligible antenatal care visits (42.5% vs. 40.3%, ARR 0.96, 95% CI 0.89–1.05, p-value 0.4) and hypertension screening and management (95.1% vs. 94.7%, ARR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96–1.03, p-value 0.8). The secondary outcome of perinatal mortality and severe perinatal morbidities was lower in the intervention (14.6%) compared to the control group (15%) (ARR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58–0.96, p-value 0.02), with the change mostly attributed to morbidity outcomes.
Conclusion
Due to technical and implementation challenges we were unable to estimate the effect of the intervention with sufficient precision. Challenges included delays in rollout of the digital health interventions and outcome data collection, existence of parallel documentation systems on paper and digital and the COVID-19 pandemic. Given these methodological constraints, we are unable to draw definitive interpretations of trial results.
Trial registration
ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN69491836; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN69491836. Date of registration 06.12.2018.
Funder
Norges Forskningsråd
Centre for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health, University of Bergen
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference36 articles.
1. The Global Strategy for Women's, Children's and adolescents' health (2016–2030): Survive, Thrive, Transform. New York: Every Woman Every Child. 2015. Available from: https://data.unicef.org/resources/global-strategy-womens-childrens-adolescents-health/. Accessed July 2023.
2. Kuruvilla S, Bustreo F, Kuo T, Mishra CK, Taylor K, Fogstad H, et al. The Global strategy for women’s, children’s and adolescents’ health (2016–2030): a roadmap based on evidence and country experience. Bull World Health Organ. 2016;94(5):398–400.
3. What is Quality of Care and why is it important? Maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health, Topics at a glance, World Health Organization. 2019. Available from: https://www.who.int/maternal_child_adoles2019cent/topics/quality-of-care/definition/en/. Accessed July 2023.
4. Puchalski Ritchie LM, Khan S, Moore JE, Timmings C, van Lettow M, Vogel JP, et al. Low- and middle-income countries face many common barriers to implementation of maternal health evidence products. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;76:229–37.
5. Agweyu A, Hill K, Diaz T, Jackson D, Hailu BG, Muzigaba M. Regular measurement is essential but insufficient to improve quality of healthcare. BMJ. 2023;380:e073412.