Feasibility of telephone-administered interviews to evaluate long-term outcomes of trauma patients in urban Ethiopia

Abstract

BackgroundLittle is known about long-term functional outcomes of trauma patients in low-income and middle-income countries. In sub-Saharan Africa most studies of injury only collect data through emergency department disposition or hospital discharge, and methods of collecting long-term data are subject to significant bias. With the recent increase in access to mobile telephone technology, we hypothesized that structured, telephone-administered interviews now offer a feasible means to collect data about the long-term functional outcomes of trauma patients in urban Ethiopia.MethodsWe piloted a telephone-administered interview tool based on the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. Using departmental logbooks, 400 consecutive patients presenting to two public referral hospitals were identified retrospectively. Demographics, injury data, and telephone numbers were collected from medical records. When a telephone number was available, patients or their surrogates were contacted and interviewed 6 months after their injuries.ResultsWe were able to contact 47% of subjects or their surrogates, and 97% of those contacted were able and willing to complete an interview. At 6-month follow-up, 22% of subjects had significant persistent functional disability. Many injuries had an ongoing financial impact, with 17% of subjects losing or changing jobs, 18% earning less than they had before their injuries, and 16% requiring ongoing injury-related medical care. Lack of documented telephone numbers and difficulty contacting subjects at recorded telephone numbers were the major obstacles to data collection. Language barriers and respondents’ refusal to participate in the study were not significant limitations.DiscussionIn urban Ethiopia, many trauma patients have persistent disability 6 months after their injuries. Telephone-administered interviews offer a promising method of collecting data about the long-term trauma outcomes, including functional status and the financial impact of injury. These data are invaluable for capacity building, quality improvement efforts, and advocacy for injury prevention and trauma care.Level of evidenceIII, retrospective cohort study.

Research Techniques Made Simple:Teledermatology in Clinical Trials

“…In developing countries, the burden of skin disease is high but often inadequately studied because of the lack of healthcare infrastructure and limited research funding. Mobile data collection tools have been used with success in these settings for health surveillance research, epidemiologic data collection, and studies to monitor disease severity and treatment response (Baloyi et al, 2018;Devi et al, 2015;Forsell et al, 2011;Ha et al, 2016;Laytin et al, 2018;Quercia et al, 2018). Communication technology can provide an opportunity for these underserved patient populations to benefit from access to new and potentially more efficacious diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in clinical trials.…”

Neurotrauma clinicians’ perspectives on the contextual challenges associated with traumatic brain injury follow up in low-income and middle-income countries: A reflexive thematic analysis

“…In 2004 the World Health Organisation (WHO) released Guidelines for Essential Trauma Care, bringing to the fore the role of surveillance and outcome data in reducing the global burden of mortality and morbidity as a result of injury [ 13 ]. This data enables clinical teams to determine the degree and breadth of physical, mental, cognitive and socio-economic sequalae post-injury [ 9 , 11 , 14 , 15 ]. Accurate data also facilitates the evaluation of systems and services, enabling: identification targets of wider systems improvement in injury prevention [ 16 ], assessment of the efficacy of management decisions and patient treatment [ 11 , 15 ], facilitation of quality improvement initiatives and clinical trials, and lastly, the establishment and continuation of registries.…”

Neurotrauma clinicians’ perspectives on the contextual challenges associated with long-term follow-up following traumatic brain injury in low-income and middle-income countries: a qualitative study protocol

“…Acknowledging heterogeneity within both LMICs and HICs, as a whole outcome data, is generally not reliably recorded in LMICs, and despite improved injury surveillance data, data on disability and long-term functional outcomes remain poorly recorded. 10 Therefore, the full picture of outcome post-TBI in LMICs is largely unknown. Laytin et al described the difficulty of collecting outcome data in resource-poor settings, specifically sub-Saharan Africa.…”

“…Challenges of collecting outcome data included weak healthcare infrastructure and limited regular follow-up of trauma patients. 10 …”

“…Despite such challenges, the collection of long-term outcomes is essential, as it provides epidemiological data to properly determine the full burden of injury and assess the efficacy of patient treatment and management decisions in LMICs. 10 11 In addition, Mock et al 6 argue that to fully understand the full burden of disease, disability must be evaluated as well as death. The collection of long-term outcomes is additionally important in the implementation and continuation of registries.…”