PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Tan, Rainer
AU  - Kavishe, Godfrey
AU  - Kulinkina, Alexandra V
AU  - Renggli, Sabine
AU  - Luwanda, Lameck B
AU  - Mangu, Chacha
AU  - Ashery, Geofrey
AU  - Jorram, Margaret
AU  - Mtebene, Ibrahim Evans
AU  - Agrea, Peter
AU  - Mhagama, Humphrey
AU  - Keitel, Kristina
AU  - Le Pogam, Marie-Annick
AU  - Ntinginya, Nyanda
AU  - Masanja, Honorati
AU  - D’Acremont, Valérie
TI  - Quality of care when using a digital clinical decision support algorithm to manage sick children at primary care health facilities in Tanzania: a cross-sectional cluster randomized controlled trial (DYNAMIC study)
AID  - 10.1101/2024.04.05.24305394
DP  - 2024 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2024.04.05.24305394
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/04/09/2024.04.05.24305394.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/04/09/2024.04.05.24305394.full
AB  - Digital clinical decision support tools have contributed to improved quality of care at primary care level health facilities. However, data from real-world randomized trials are lacking.We conducted a cluster randomized, open-label trial in Tanzania evaluating the use of a digital clinical decision support algorithm (CDSA), enhanced by point-of-care tests, training and mentorship, compared with usual care, among sick children 2 to 59 months old presenting to primary care facilities for an acute illness in Tanzania (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05144763). The primary outcome was the mean proportion of 14 major Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) symptoms and signs assessed by clinicians. Secondary outcomes included antibiotic prescription, counselling provided, and the appropriateness of antimalarial and antibiotic prescriptions.A total of 450 consultations were observed in 9 intervention and 9 control health facilities. The mean proportion of major symptoms and signs assessed in intervention health facilities was 46.4% (range 7.7% to 91.7%) compared to 26.3% (range 0% to 66.7%) in control health facilities, an adjusted difference of 15.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.8% to 25.4%). Only weight, height, and pallor were assessed more often when using the digital CDSA than in controls. Observed antibiotic prescription was 37.3% in intervention facilities, and 76.4% in control facilities (adjusted risk ratio 0.5; 95% CI 0.4 to 0.7; p<0.001). Appropriate antibiotic prescription was 81.9% in intervention facilities and 51.4% in control facilities (adjusted risk ratio 1.5; 95% CI 1.2 to 1.8; p=0.003).The implementation of a digital CDSA improved only slightly the mean proportion of IMCI symptoms and signs assessed in consultations with sick children, and most symptoms and signs were assessed infrequently. Nonetheless, antibiotics were prescribed less often, and more appropriately Innovative approaches to overcome barriers related to clinicians’ motivation and work environment are needed.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialClinicalTrials.gov number NCT05144763Clinical Protocols https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05144763 Funding StatementThis work was supported by a grant from the Fondation Botnar, Switzerland (grant number 6278) (V.D.A.) and from the Swiss Development Cooperation (project number 7F-10361.01.01) (V.D.A.). The study sponsor (Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Unisanté, University of Lausanne) led the study design, the writing of the report and the decision to submit the article for publication. The funders of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation or writing of the report.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethical approvals were granted from the Ifakara Health Institute (IHI/IRB/No: 11-2020), the Mbeya Medical Research Ethics Committee (SZEC-2439/R.A/V.1/65), the National Institute for Medical Research Ethics Committee (NIMR/HQ/R.8a/Vol. IX/3486 and NIMR/HQ/R.8a/Vol. IX/3583) in Tanzania and from the cantonal ethics review board of Vaud (CER-VD 2020-02800) in Switzerland.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesDe-identified data can be found at 10.5281/zenodo.10849644 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10849644