Background. Breast cancer incidence is increasing in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). Mortality/incidence ratios in LMICs are higher than in high-income countries, likely at least in part because of delayed diagnoses leading to advanced-stage presentations. In the present study, we investigated the magnitude, impact of, and risk factors for, patient and system delays in breast cancer diagnosis in Rwanda. Materials and Methods. We interviewed patients with breast complaints at two rural Rwandan hospitals providing cancer care and reviewed their medical records to determine the diagnosis, diagnosis date, and breast cancer stage. Results. A total of 144 patients were included in our analysis. Median total delay was 15 months, and median patient and system delays were both 5 months. In multivariate analyses, patient and system delays of $6 months were significantly

BackgroundWeak health information systems (HIS) are a critical challenge to reaching the health-related Millennium Development Goals because health systems performance cannot be adequately assessed or monitored where HIS data are incomplete, inaccurate, or untimely. The Population Health Implementation and Training (PHIT) Partnerships were established in five sub-Saharan African countries (Ghana, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Zambia) to catalyze advances in strengthening district health systems. Interventions were tailored to the setting in which activities were planned.Comparisons across strategiesAll five PHIT Partnerships share a common feature in their goal of enhancing HIS and linking data with improved decision-making, specific strategies varied. Mozambique, Ghana, and Tanzania all focus on improving the quality and use of the existing Ministry of Health HIS, while the Zambia and Rwanda partnerships have introduced new information and communication technology systems or tools. All partnerships have adopted a flexible, iterative approach in designing and refining the development of new tools and approaches for HIS enhancement (such as routine data quality audits and automated troubleshooting), as well as improving decision making through timely feedback on health system performance (such as through summary data dashboards or routine data review meetings). The most striking differences between partnership approaches can be found in the level of emphasis of data collection (patient versus health facility), and consequently the level of decision making enhancement (community, facility, district, or provincial leadership).DiscussionDesign differences across PHIT Partnerships reflect differing theories of change, particularly regarding what information is needed, who will use the information to affect change, and how this change is expected to manifest. The iterative process of data use to monitor and assess the health system has been heavily communication dependent, with challenges due to poor feedback loops. Implementation to date has highlighted the importance of engaging frontline staff and managers in improving data collection and its use for informing system improvement. Through rigorous process and impact evaluation, the experience of the PHIT teams hope to contribute to the evidence base in the areas of HIS strengthening, linking HIS with decision making, and its impact on measures of health system outputs and impact.

Background: With increasing rates of chronic disease associated with lifestyle behavioural risk factors, there is urgent need for intervention strategies in primary health care. Currently there is a gap in the knowledge of factors that influence the delivery of preventive strategies by General Practitioners (GPs) around interventions for smoking, nutrition, alcohol consumption and physical activity (SNAP). This qualitative study explores the delivery of lifestyle behavioural risk factor screening and management by GPs within a 45-49 year old health check consultation. The aims of this research are to identify the influences affecting GPs' choosing to screen and choosing to manage SNAP lifestyle risk factors, as well as identify influences on screening and management when multiple SNAP factors exist.

A program of intensive community-based treatment support for ART in rural Rwanda had excellent outcomes in 24-month retention in care. Having committed to improving access to HIV treatment in sub-Saharan Africa, the international community, including country HIV programs, should set high programmatic outcome benchmarks.

Team climate is important for patient and staff satisfaction. In large general practices, separate sub-cultures may exist between administrative and clinical staff, which has implications for designing effective team interventions.

BackgroundHealth data can be useful for effective service delivery, decision making, and evaluating existing programs in order to maintain high quality of healthcare. Studies have shown variability in data quality from national health management information systems (HMISs) in sub-Saharan Africa which threatens utility of these data as a tool to improve health systems. The purpose of this study is to assess the quality of Rwanda's HMIS data over a 5-year period.MethodsThe World Health Organization (WHO) data quality report card framework was used to assess the quality of HMIS data captured from 2008 to 2012 and is a census of all 495 publicly funded health facilities in Rwanda. Factors assessed included completeness and internal consistency of 10 indicators selected based on WHO recommendations and priority areas for the Rwanda national health sector. Completeness was measured as percentage of non-missing reports. Consistency was measured as the absence of extreme outliers, internal consistency between related indicators, and consistency of indicators over time. These assessments were done at the district and national level.ResultsNationally, the average monthly district reporting completeness rate was 98% across 10 key indicators from 2008 to 2012. Completeness of indicator data increased over time: 2008, 88%; 2009, 91%; 2010, 89%; 2011, 90%; and 2012, 95% (p<0.0001). Comparing 2011 and 2012 health events to the mean of the three preceding years, service output increased from 3% (2011) to 9% (2012). Eighty-three percent of districts reported ratios between related indicators (ANC/DTP1, DTP1/DTP3) consistent with HMIS national ratios.Conclusion and policy implicationsOur findings suggest that HMIS data quality in Rwanda has been improving over time. We recommend maintaining these assessments to identify remaining gaps in data quality and that results are shared publicly to support increased use of HMIS data.

In rural Rwanda, the causes of heart failure are almost exclusively nonischemic even though patients often present with advanced symptoms. Training nurses, supervised by physicians, in simplified protocols and basic echocardiography is 1 approach to integrated, decentralized care for this vulnerable population.

BackgroundNationally, health in Rwanda has been improving since 2000, with considerable improvement since 2005. Despite improvements, rural areas continue to lag behind urban sectors with regard to key health outcomes. Partners In Health (PIH) has been supporting the Rwanda Ministry of Health (MOH) in two rural districts in Rwanda since 2005. Since 2009, the MOH and PIH have spearheaded a health systems strengthening (HSS) intervention in these districts as part of the Rwanda Population Health Implementation and Training (PHIT) Partnership. The partnership is guided by the belief that HSS interventions should be comprehensive, integrated, responsive to local conditions, and address health care access, cost, and quality. The PHIT Partnership represents a collaboration between the MOH and PIH, with support from the National University of Rwanda School of Public Health, the National Institute of Statistics, Harvard Medical School, and Brigham and Women’s Hospital.Description of interventionThe PHIT Partnership’s health systems support aligns with the World Health Organization’s six health systems building blocks. HSS activities focus across all levels of the health system — community, health center, hospital, and district leadership — to improve health care access, quality, delivery, and health outcomes. Interventions are concentrated on three main areas: targeted support for health facilities, quality improvement initiatives, and a strengthened network of community health workers.Evaluation designThe impact of activities will be assessed using population-level outcomes data collected through oversampling of the demographic and health survey (DHS) in the intervention districts. The overall impact evaluation is complemented by an analysis of trends in facility health care utilization. A comprehensive costing project captures the total expenditures and financial inputs of the health care system to determine the cost of systems improvement. Targeted evaluations and operational research pieces focus on specific programmatic components, supported by partnership-supported work to build in-country research capacity.DiscussionBuilding on early successes, the work of the Rwanda PHIT Partnership approach to HSS has already seen noticeable increases in facility capacity and quality of care. The rigorous planned evaluation of the Partnership’s HSS activities will contribute to global knowledge about intervention methodology, cost, and population health impact.