21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Point-of-Care Diagnostics for Improving Maternal Health in South Africa

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Improving maternal health is a global priority, particularly in high HIV-endemic, resource-limited settings. Failure to use health care facilities due to poor access is one of the main causes of maternal deaths in South Africa. “Point-of-care” (POC) diagnostics are an innovative healthcare approach to improve healthcare access and health outcomes in remote and resource-limited settings. In this review, POC testing is defined as a diagnostic test that is carried out near patients and leads to rapid clinical decisions. We review the current and emerging POC diagnostics for maternal health, with a specific focus on the World Health Organization (WHO) quality-ASSURED (Affordability, Sensitivity, Specificity, User friendly, Rapid and robust, Equipment free and Delivered) criteria for an ideal point-of-care test in resource-limited settings. The performance of POC diagnostics, barriers and challenges related to implementing POC diagnostics for maternal health in rural and resource-limited settings are reviewed. Innovative strategies for overcoming these barriers are recommended to achieve substantial progress on improving maternal health outcomes in these settings.

          Related collections

          Most cited references92

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Diagnostic point-of-care tests in resource-limited settings.

          The aim of diagnostic point-of-care testing is to minimise the time to obtain a test result, thereby allowing clinicians and patients to make a quick clinical decision. Because point-of-care tests are used in resource-limited settings, the benefits need to outweigh the costs. To optimise point-of-care testing in resource-limited settings, diagnostic tests need rigorous assessments focused on relevant clinical outcomes and operational costs, which differ from assessments of conventional diagnostic tests. We reviewed published studies on point-of-care testing in resource-limited settings, and found no clearly defined metric for the clinical usefulness of point-of-care testing. Therefore, we propose a framework for the assessment of point-of-care tests, and suggest and define the term test efficacy to describe the ability of a diagnostic test to support a clinical decision within its operational context. We also propose revised criteria for an ideal diagnostic point-of-care test in resource-limited settings. Through systematic assessments, comparisons between centralised testing and novel point-of-care technologies can be more formalised, and health officials can better establish which point-of-care technologies represent valuable additions to their clinical programmes. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Point-of-Care Testing for Infectious Diseases: Diversity, Complexity, and Barriers in Low- And Middle-Income Countries

            Madhukar Pai and colleagues discuss a framework for envisioning how point-of-care testing can be applied to infectious diseases in low- and middle-income countries.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Gestational diabetes and pregnancy outcomes - a systematic review of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) diagnostic criteria

              Background Two criteria based on a 2 h 75 g OGTT are being used for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes (GDM), those recommended over the years by the World Health Organization (WHO), and those recently recommended by the International Association for Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG), the latter generated in the HAPO study and based on pregnancy outcomes. Our aim is to systematically review the evidence for the associations between GDM (according to these criteria) and adverse outcomes. Methods We searched relevant studies in MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the Cochrane Library, CINHAL, WHO-Afro library, IMSEAR, EMCAT, IMEMR and WPRIM. We included cohort studies permitting the evaluation of GDM diagnosed by WHO and or IADPSG criteria against adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes in untreated women. Only studies with universal application of a 75 g OGTT were included. Relative risks (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were obtained for each study. We combined study results using a random-effects model. Inconsistency across studies was defined by an inconsistency index (I2) > 50%. Results Data were extracted from eight studies, totaling 44,829 women. Greater risk of adverse outcomes was observed for both diagnostic criteria. When using the WHO criteria, consistent associations were seen for macrosomia (RR = 1.81; 95%CI 1.47-2.22; p < 0.001); large for gestational age (RR = 1.53; 95%CI 1.39-1.69; p < 0.001); perinatal mortality (RR = 1.55; 95% CI 0.88-2.73; p = 0.13); preeclampsia (RR = 1.69; 95%CI 1.31-2.18; p < 0.001); and cesarean delivery (RR = 1.37;95%CI 1.24-1.51; p < 0.001). Less data were available for the IADPSG criteria, and associations were inconsistent across studies (I2 ≥ 73%). Magnitudes of RRs and their 95%CIs were 1.73 (1.28-2.35; p = 0.001) for large for gestational age; 1.71 (1.38-2.13; p < 0.001) for preeclampsia; and 1.23 (1.01-1.51; p = 0.04) for cesarean delivery. Excluding either the HAPO or the EBDG studies minimally altered these associations, but the RRs seen for the IADPSG criteria were reduced after excluding HAPO. Conclusions The WHO and the IADPSG criteria for GDM identified women at a small increased risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes. Associations were of similar magnitude for both criteria. However, high inconsistency was seen for those with the IADPSG criteria. Full evaluation of the latter in settings other than HAPO requires additional studies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Diagnostics (Basel)
                Diagnostics (Basel)
                diagnostics
                Diagnostics
                MDPI
                2075-4418
                31 August 2016
                September 2016
                : 6
                : 3
                : 31
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Discipline of Public Health, School of Nursing and Public Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4001, South Africa; Sartorius@ 123456ukzn.ac.za
                [2 ]International Clinical Research Center, Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA; pkdrain@ 123456uw.edu
                [3 ]Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
                [4 ]Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
                [5 ]Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: Mashamba-Thompson@ 123456ukzn.ac.za ; Tel.: +27-031-260-2530
                Article
                diagnostics-06-00031
                10.3390/diagnostics6030031
                5039565
                27589808
                2992de21-1e43-4db6-ab0f-fdd5c115b24e
                © 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

                This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 26 June 2016
                : 19 August 2016
                Categories
                Review

                hiv,maternal health,point-of-care diagnostics,resource-limited settings

                Comments

                Comment on this article