Search

Background: Quality assessments of gonococcal surveillance data are critical to improve data validity and to enhance the value of surveillance findings. Detecting data errors by systematic audits identifies areas for quality improvement. We designed and implemented an internal audit process to evaluate the accuracy and completeness of surveillance data for the Thailand Enhanced Gonococcal Antimicrobial Surveillance Programme (EGASP). Methods: We conducted a data quality audit of source records by comparison with the data stored in the EGASP database for five audit cycles from 2015–2021. Ten percent of culture-confirmed cases of Neisseria gonorrhoeae were randomly sampled along with any cases identified with elevated antimicrobial susceptibility testing results and cases with repeat infections. Incorrect and incomplete data were investigated, and corrective action and preventive actions (CAPA) were implemented. Accuracy was defined as the percentage of identical data in both the source records and the database. Completeness was defined as the percentage of non-missing data from either the source document or the database. Statistical analyses were performed using the t-test and the Fisher's exact test. Results: We sampled and reviewed 70, 162, 85, 68, and 46 EGASP records during the five audit cycles. Overall accuracy and completeness in the five audit cycles ranged from 93.6% to 99.4% and 95.0% to 99.9%, respectively. Overall, completeness was significantly higher than accuracy (p = 0.017). For each laboratory and clinical data element, concordance was >85% in all audit cycles except for two laboratory data elements in two audit cycles. These elements significantly improved following identification and CAPA implementation. Discussion: We found a high level of data accuracy and completeness in the five audit cycles. The implementation of the audit process identified areas for improvement. Systematic quality assessments of laboratory and clinical data ensure high quality EGASP surveillance data to monitor for antimicrobial resistant Neisseria gonorrhoeae in Thailand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Serological assays to determine HIV incidence have contributed to estimates of HIV incidence, monitoring of HIV spread, and evaluation of prevention strategies. Two frequently used incidence assays are the Sedia HIV-1 LAg-Avidity EIA (LAg) and the Bio-Rad avidity incidence (BRAI) assays with a mean duration of recent infection (MDRI) of 130 and 240 days for subtype B infections, respectively. Little is known about how these assays perform with recombinant HIV-1 strains. We evaluated the concordance of these assays in a population infected mainly with HIV-1 CRF06_cpx. Material/Methods: Remnant serum samples (n = 288) collected from confirmed, newly-diagnosed HIV-positive persons from Estonia in 2013 were tested. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from clinical databases. LAg was performed according to the manufacturer’s protocol and BRAI testing was done using a validated protocol. Samples with LAg-pending or BRAI-invalid results were reclassified as recent if they were from persons with viral loads <1000 copies/mL or were reclassified as long-term if presenting with AIDS. Results: In total 325 new HIV infections were diagnosed in 2013 in Estonia. Of those 276 persons were tested with both LAg and BRAI. Using assay results only, the recency rate was 44% and 70% by LAg and BRAI, respectively. The majority of samples (92%) recent by LAg were recent by BRAI. Similarly, 89% of samples long-term by BRAI were long-term by LAg. After clinical information was included in the analysis, the recency rate was 44% and 62% for LAg and BRAI, respectively. The majority of samples (86%) recent by LAg were recent by BRAI and 91% of long-term infections by BRAI were long-term by LAg. Conclusions: Comparison of LAg and BRAI results in this mostly CRF06_cpx-infected population showed good concordance for incidence classification. Our finding of a higher recency rate with BRAI in this population is likely related to the longer MDRI for this assay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]