Is a rheumatic fever register the best surveillance tool to evaluate rheumatic fever control in the Auckland region?

N Z Med J. 2017 Aug 11;130(1460):48-62.

Abstract

Aim: To determine the most accurate data source for acute rheumatic fever (ARF) epidemiology in the Auckland region.

Method: To assess coverage of the Auckland Regional Rheumatic Fever Register (ARRFR), (1998-2010) for children <15 years and resident in Auckland at the time of illness, register, hospitalisation and notification data were compared. A consistent definition was applied to determine definite and probable cases of ARF using clinical records. (www.heartfoundation.org.nz) RESULTS: Of 559 confirmed (definite and probable) RF cases <15 years (median age 10 years), seven were recurrences. Of 552 first episodes, the ARRFR identified 548 (99%), hospitalisations identified 501 (91%) including four not on the register, and public health notifications identified 384 (70%). Of hospitalisation cases, 33% (245/746), and of notifications 20% (94/478) did not meet the case definition and were therefore excluded. Between 1998-2010, eight cases, initially entered as ARF on the ARRFR, were later removed once further clinical detail was available.

Conclusion: The ARRFR produced the most accurate information surrounding new cases of ARF (for children <15 years) for the years 1998-2010 in Auckland. This was significantly more accurate than medical officer of health notification and hospitalisation data.

Publication types

  • Evaluation Study

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Child
  • Child, Preschool
  • Female
  • Hospitalization / statistics & numerical data
  • Humans
  • Male
  • New Zealand / epidemiology
  • Public Health Surveillance / methods
  • Registries*
  • Regression Analysis
  • Rheumatic Fever / epidemiology*