METHODS: Currently available indicators from both household and facility surveys were collated through publicly available global databases and respective survey instruments. We then developed a suite of potential indicators and associated data points for the 45 WHO Essential Interventions spanning preconception to newborn care. Four types of performance indicators were identified (where applicable): process (i.e. coverage) and outcome (i.e. impact) indicators for both screening and treatment/prevention. Indicators were evaluated by an international expert panel against the eRegistries indicator evaluation criteria and further refined based on feedback by the eRegistries technical team.
RESULTS: Of the 45 WHO Essential Interventions, only 16 were addressed in any of the household survey data available. A set of 216 potential indicators was developed. These indicators were generally evaluated favourably by the panel, but difficulties in data ascertainment, including for outcome measures of cause-specific morbidity and mortality, were frequently reported as barriers to the feasibility of indicators. Indicators were refined based on feedback, culminating in the final list of 193 total unique indicators: 93 for preconception and antenatal care; 53 for childbirth and postpartum care; and 47 for newborn and small and ill baby care.
CONCLUSIONS: Large gaps exist in the availability of information currently collected to support the implementation of the WHO Essential Interventions. The development of this suite of indicators can be used to support the implementation of eRegistries and other data platforms, to ensure that data are utilised to support evidence-based practice, facilitate measurement and accountability, and improve maternal and child health outcomes.
INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous edge-to-edge repair of severe MR using the MitraClip device is approved for use in the USA for high risk DMR while European guidelines include its use in FMR patients as well.
METHODS: The MitraClip in the Asia-Pacific Registry (MARS) is a multicenter retrospective registry, involving eight sites in five Asia-Pacific countries. Clinical and echocardiographic characteristics, procedural outcomes and 1-month outcomes [death and major adverse events (MAE)] were compared between FMR and DMR patients treated with the MitraClip.
RESULTS: A total of 163 patients were included from 2011 to 2014. The acute procedural success rates for FMR (95.5%, n = 84) and DMR (92%, n = 69) were similar (P = 0.515). 45% of FMR had ≥2 clips inserted compared to 60% of those with DMR (P = 0.064).The 30-day mortality rate for FMR and DMR was similar at 4.5% and 6.7% respectively (P = 0.555). The 30-day MAE rate was 9.2% for FMR and 14.7% for DMR (P = 0.281). Both FMR and DMR patients had significant improvements in the severity of MR and NYHA class after 30 days. There was a significantly greater reduction in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (P = 0.002) and end systolic diameter (P = 0.017) in DMR than in FMR.
CONCLUSIONS: The MitraClip therapy is a safe and efficacious treatment option for both FMR and DMR. Although, there is a significantly greater reduction in LV volumes in DMR, patients in both groups report clinical benefit with improvement in functional class. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
METHODS: This study analysed all traumatic brain injury cases for children ages 0-19 included in the 2010 NTrD report.
RESULTS: A total of 5,836 paediatric patients were admitted to emergency departments (ED) of reporting hospitals for trauma. Of these, 742 patients (12.7 %) suffered from brain injuries. Among those with brain injuries, the mortality rate was 11.9 and 71.2 % were aged between 15 and 19. Traffic accidents were the most common mode of injury (95.4 %). Out of the total for traffic accidents, 80.2 % of brain injuries were incurred in motorcycle accidents. Severity of injury was higher among males and patients who were transferred or referred to the reporting centres from other clinics. Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) total score and type of admission were found to be statistically significant, χ (2) (5, N = 178) = 66.53, p