{"title":"刚果民主共和国过度报告常规免疫管理数据的原因:一项混合横断面研究,以确定数据质量差的解释因素。","authors":"Dosithée Ngo-Bebe, Fulbert Nappa Kwilu, Joël Nkiama Konde, Daniel Katuashi Ishoso, Félicité Langwana, Cedric Mwanga, Leon Mbulu Kinuani, Christophe Lungayo Luhata, Jean-Crispin Mukendi, Aimé Mwana-Wabene Cikomola, Marcellin Mengouo Nimpa","doi":"10.1186/s12889-025-24639-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Differences of more than 30% have been observed between the results of vaccine coverage surveys and routine vaccine coverage data. In the context of the organization and operation of the health system, the study focused on investigating explanatory factors for over-reporting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a mixed-method, cross-sectional, and analytical study. Over-reporting of routine immunization data was defined as a discrepancy of ≥ 10% points between routine data and survey data or recount data (standards) for the Penta3 vaccine. Data were collected by questionnaire from 117 health centers, 30 health zone offices, and 13 provincial health offices. Bivariable and multivariable analyses (α = 5%) were used to find factors influencing over-reporting. Data from 30 in-depth interviews were collected to complement quantitative data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The phenomenon of over-reporting of routine immunization data was verified in the health zones (90% or 77%) and health centers (43%) surveyed in 2019 and 2020. At the health zone level, six explanatory factors emerged. The most significant tree variables being the pressure exerted on managers to achieve pre-established annual targets (p = 0.016), the availability of data collection tools (p = 0.010) and bearer message for manual transport of reports (p = 0.031). At the health center level, seven factors were found, and the four most significant were: availability of a cell phone (p = 0.002), existence of table or graph for coverage monitoring (p = 0.003), availability of a computer in the health center (p = 0.007) and designated health data collector (p = 0.015). Qualitative data revealed three over-reporting practices: deliberate inflation of vaccine delivery figures, readjustment of expected target population figures, and occasional errors in data transcription.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Over-reporting is essentially generated by providers. Solving this problem requires lifting the pressure exerted on managers at different levels of the health system, making data management more secure, and qualifying the staff responsible for managing immunization data.</p>","PeriodicalId":9039,"journal":{"name":"BMC Public Health","volume":"25 1","pages":"3272"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12487160/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reasons for over-reporting of routine immunization administrative data in the Democratic Republic of Congo: a mixed cross-sectional study to determine explanatory factors for poor data quality.\",\"authors\":\"Dosithée Ngo-Bebe, Fulbert Nappa Kwilu, Joël Nkiama Konde, Daniel Katuashi Ishoso, Félicité Langwana, Cedric Mwanga, Leon Mbulu Kinuani, Christophe Lungayo Luhata, Jean-Crispin Mukendi, Aimé Mwana-Wabene Cikomola, Marcellin Mengouo Nimpa\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12889-025-24639-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Differences of more than 30% have been observed between the results of vaccine coverage surveys and routine vaccine coverage data. In the context of the organization and operation of the health system, the study focused on investigating explanatory factors for over-reporting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a mixed-method, cross-sectional, and analytical study. Over-reporting of routine immunization data was defined as a discrepancy of ≥ 10% points between routine data and survey data or recount data (standards) for the Penta3 vaccine. Data were collected by questionnaire from 117 health centers, 30 health zone offices, and 13 provincial health offices. Bivariable and multivariable analyses (α = 5%) were used to find factors influencing over-reporting. Data from 30 in-depth interviews were collected to complement quantitative data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The phenomenon of over-reporting of routine immunization data was verified in the health zones (90% or 77%) and health centers (43%) surveyed in 2019 and 2020. At the health zone level, six explanatory factors emerged. The most significant tree variables being the pressure exerted on managers to achieve pre-established annual targets (p = 0.016), the availability of data collection tools (p = 0.010) and bearer message for manual transport of reports (p = 0.031). At the health center level, seven factors were found, and the four most significant were: availability of a cell phone (p = 0.002), existence of table or graph for coverage monitoring (p = 0.003), availability of a computer in the health center (p = 0.007) and designated health data collector (p = 0.015). Qualitative data revealed three over-reporting practices: deliberate inflation of vaccine delivery figures, readjustment of expected target population figures, and occasional errors in data transcription.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Over-reporting is essentially generated by providers. Solving this problem requires lifting the pressure exerted on managers at different levels of the health system, making data management more secure, and qualifying the staff responsible for managing immunization data.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9039,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Public Health\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"3272\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12487160/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-025-24639-3\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-025-24639-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reasons for over-reporting of routine immunization administrative data in the Democratic Republic of Congo: a mixed cross-sectional study to determine explanatory factors for poor data quality.
Background: Differences of more than 30% have been observed between the results of vaccine coverage surveys and routine vaccine coverage data. In the context of the organization and operation of the health system, the study focused on investigating explanatory factors for over-reporting.
Methods: This was a mixed-method, cross-sectional, and analytical study. Over-reporting of routine immunization data was defined as a discrepancy of ≥ 10% points between routine data and survey data or recount data (standards) for the Penta3 vaccine. Data were collected by questionnaire from 117 health centers, 30 health zone offices, and 13 provincial health offices. Bivariable and multivariable analyses (α = 5%) were used to find factors influencing over-reporting. Data from 30 in-depth interviews were collected to complement quantitative data.
Results: The phenomenon of over-reporting of routine immunization data was verified in the health zones (90% or 77%) and health centers (43%) surveyed in 2019 and 2020. At the health zone level, six explanatory factors emerged. The most significant tree variables being the pressure exerted on managers to achieve pre-established annual targets (p = 0.016), the availability of data collection tools (p = 0.010) and bearer message for manual transport of reports (p = 0.031). At the health center level, seven factors were found, and the four most significant were: availability of a cell phone (p = 0.002), existence of table or graph for coverage monitoring (p = 0.003), availability of a computer in the health center (p = 0.007) and designated health data collector (p = 0.015). Qualitative data revealed three over-reporting practices: deliberate inflation of vaccine delivery figures, readjustment of expected target population figures, and occasional errors in data transcription.
Conclusion: Over-reporting is essentially generated by providers. Solving this problem requires lifting the pressure exerted on managers at different levels of the health system, making data management more secure, and qualifying the staff responsible for managing immunization data.
期刊介绍:
BMC Public Health is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on the epidemiology of disease and the understanding of all aspects of public health. The journal has a special focus on the social determinants of health, the environmental, behavioral, and occupational correlates of health and disease, and the impact of health policies, practices and interventions on the community.