Cochrane · systematic review · CD012012
Routine Health Information System (RHIS) improvements for strengthened health system management
Leon, N, Balakrishna, Y, Hohlfeld, A, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2020 · Cochrane Library
Effective Practice and Organisation of CareAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
61
current version
GRADE rated
26
No studies
35
Included studies
NR
No studies 35 · 57.4%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 18 · 29.5%Low 1 · 1.6%Moderate 7 · 11.5%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Web‐based electronic TB laboratory information system compared to a paper‐based system
Population: health‐district‐wide electronic TB laboratory information system for improving the timeliness of test results and treatment in the TB control programme
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Data quality Web‐based electronic TB laboratory information system vs a paper‐based system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Length of time to report TB culture test results Web‐based electronic TB laboratory information system vs a paper‐based system | HR 0.68 [0.65, 0.72] | 1 study · 1671 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Length of time to report TB drug susceptibility test results Web‐based electronic TB laboratory information system vs a paper‐based system | HR 0.67 [0.62, 0.72] | 1 study · 1671 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Recording errors of TB culture test results (Overall) Web‐based electronic TB laboratory information system vs a paper‐based system | OR 0.13 [0.07, 0.24] | 1 study · 1195 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Recording errors of TB drug susceptibility test results (Overall) Web‐based electronic TB laboratory information system vs a paper‐based system | OR 0.17 [0.09, 0.32] | 1 study · 1270 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Recording errors: misidentification errors for TB culture test resultse Web‐based electronic TB laboratory information system vs a paper‐based system | OR 1.15 [0.47, 2.81] | 1 study · 1 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Recording errors: misidentification errors for TB drug susceptibility test resultse Web‐based electronic TB laboratory information system vs a paper‐based system | OR 1.1 [0.46, 2.63] | 1 study · 1 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Service quality Web‐based electronic TB laboratory information system vs a paper‐based system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Timeliness of starting or changing a patient's TB treatment Web‐based electronic TB laboratory information system vs a paper‐based system | HR 0.82 [0.55, 1.22] | 1 study · 1671 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Information use Web‐based electronic TB laboratory information system vs a paper‐based system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Functioning of the RHIS Web‐based electronic TB laboratory information system vs a paper‐based system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health provider outcomes Web‐based electronic TB laboratory information system vs a paper‐based system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Hand‐held electronic device for collecting TB laboratory information compared to a paper‐based system
Population: health district personnel using a hand‐held PDA electronic data collection tool to improve the quality and timeliness of collecting district‐wide TB test results.
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Data quality Hand‐held electronic device for collecting TB laboratory information vs a paper‐based system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Length of time to report TB culture test results Hand‐held electronic device for collecting TB laboratory information vs a paper‐based system | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 6153 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Length of time to report TB smear test results Hand‐held electronic device for collecting TB laboratory information vs a paper‐based system | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 6226 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Recording errorsd Hand‐held electronic device for collecting TB laboratory information vs a paper‐based system | OR 0.41 [0.26, 0.65] | 1 study · 2082 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Recording errors: misidentification errorse Hand‐held electronic device for collecting TB laboratory information vs a paper‐based system | OR 0.14 [0.02, 1.2] | 1 study · 2082 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Service quality Hand‐held electronic device for collecting TB laboratory information vs a paper‐based system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Information use Hand‐held electronic device for collecting TB laboratory information vs a paper‐based system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Functioning of the RHIS Hand‐held electronic device for collecting TB laboratory information vs a paper‐based system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health provider outcomes Hand‐held electronic device for collecting TB laboratory information vs a paper‐based system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Electronic hospital health information system compared to a paper‐based health information system
Population: electronic hospital health information to improve hospital functioning
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Service quality Electronic hospital health information system vs a paper‐based health information system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Length of time outpatients spend at hospital Electronic hospital health information system vs a paper‐based health information system | no estimate extracted | 23 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Length of hospital stay Electronic hospital health information system vs a paper‐based health information system | no estimate extracted | 23 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Revenue collection Electronic hospital health information system vs a paper‐based health information system | no estimate extracted | 23 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Data quality Electronic hospital health information system vs a paper‐based health information system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Information use Electronic hospital health information system vs a paper‐based health information system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Functioning of the RHIS Electronic hospital health information system vs a paper‐based health information system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health provider outcomes Electronic hospital health information system vs a paper‐based health information system | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
High‐intensity brief text messaging (SMS) compared to low‐intensity brief text messaging
Population: Community health care workers, known as Health Surveillance Assistants (HSAs) (n = 156) associated with 30 health facilities.
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Data quality High‐intensity brief text messaging (SMS) vs low‐intensity brief text messaging | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Documenting of matched pregnancy outcome data High‐intensity brief text messaging (SMS) vs low‐intensity brief text messaging | OR 0.94 [0.63, 1.38] | 1 study · 10934 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Service quality High‐intensity brief text messaging (SMS) vs low‐intensity brief text messaging | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Information use High‐intensity brief text messaging (SMS) vs low‐intensity brief text messaging | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Functioning of the RHIS High‐intensity brief text messaging (SMS) vs low‐intensity brief text messaging | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health provider outcomes High‐intensity brief text messaging (SMS) vs low‐intensity brief text messaging | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Electronic drug stock notification system with data management support compared to paper‐based stock notification
Population: community‐based health care workers, known in Malawi as Health Surveillance Assistants (HSAs) managing medicines and other medical products for community‐based treatment of common childhood illnesses.
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Service quality Electronic drug stock notification system with data management support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Functioning bicycles for transporting stock Electronic drug stock notification system with data management support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | 132 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Health surveillance assistants with all 3 products in stock Electronic drug stock notification system with data management support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | 484 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Health surveillance assistants with all 4 products in stock Electronic drug stock notification system with data management support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | 484 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Data quality Electronic drug stock notification system with data management support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Information use Electronic drug stock notification system with data management support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Functioning of the RHIS Electronic drug stock notification system with data management support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health provider outcomes Electronic drug stock notification system with data management support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Electronic drug stock notification system with product transport support compared to paper‐based stock notification
Population: community‐based health care workers, known in Malawi as Health Surveillance Assistants (HSAs) managing medicines and other medical products for community‐based treatment of common childhood illnesses
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Service quality Electronic drug stock notification system with product transport support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Functioning bicycles for transporting stock Electronic drug stock notification system with product transport support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | 136 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Health surveillance assistants with all 3 products in stock Electronic drug stock notification system with product transport support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | 326 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Health surveillance assistants with all 4 products in stock Electronic drug stock notification system with product transport support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | 326 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Data quality Electronic drug stock notification system with product transport support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Information use Electronic drug stock notification system with product transport support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Functioning of the RHIS Electronic drug stock notification system with product transport support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health provider outcomes Electronic drug stock notification system with product transport support vs paper‐based stock notification | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health information strengthening as part of comprehensive quality improvement compared to no quality improvement
Population: intervention health facilities (n = 24 health facilities)
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Service quality Health information strengthening as part of comprehensive quality improvement vs no quality improvement | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health worker motivation a Health information strengthening as part of comprehensive quality improvement vs no quality improvement | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 1 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Receipt of training by health workers f Health information strengthening as part of comprehensive quality improvement vs no quality improvement | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 1 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Health information indexg Health information strengthening as part of comprehensive quality improvement vs no quality improvement | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 1 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Quality of clinical observation ‐ childrenh Health information strengthening as part of comprehensive quality improvement vs no quality improvement | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 1 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Quality of clinical observation ‐ adultsi Health information strengthening as part of comprehensive quality improvement vs no quality improvement | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 1 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Data quality Health information strengthening as part of comprehensive quality improvement vs no quality improvement | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Information use Health information strengthening as part of comprehensive quality improvement vs no quality improvement | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Functioning of the RHIS Health information strengthening as part of comprehensive quality improvement vs no quality improvement | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health provider outcomes Health information strengthening as part of comprehensive quality improvement vs no quality improvement | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |