Table 1 Disposition and success of updating vital status through manual record review, phone tracking, and physical tracking amongst patients newly diagnosed with Kaposi sarcoma in four countries in sub-Saharan Africa
| Â | AMPATH - Kenya | ISS - Uganda | Lighthouse- Malawi | UATH & NHA - Nigeria | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Patients diagnosed with Kaposi sarcoma | 678 | 173 | 314 | 57 | 1222 |
Presumed LTFU in EMR (D1 in Fig. 1) | 249 | 80 | 75 | 36 | 440 |
Reclassification after manual review of LTFU in EMR | |||||
 Not truly LTFU: Vital status determined via manual review (N1b in Fig. 1) | 16 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 18 |
 Truly LTFU but vital status determined by repeat later review of records (N1a in Fig. 1) | 11 | 0 | 2 | 11 | 24 |
 Truly LTFU: Vital status missing after review of all records (D2 in Fig. 1) | 222 | 79 | 72 | 25 | 398 |
Disposition of those who appear LTFU in EMR (D1 in Fig. 1) | |||||
 Vital status updated by manual records review | 27/249 (11%) | 1/80 (1.3%) | 3/75 (4.0%) | 11/36 (31%) | 42/440 (9.6%) |
 Vital status updated by phone contact alone | 83/249 (33%) | 10/80 (13%) | 3/75 (4.0%) | 15/36 (42%) | 111/440 (25%) |
 Vital status updated by physical tracking | 124/249 (50%) | 47/80 (59%) | 22/75 (29%) | 3/36 (8.3%) | 196/440 (45%) |
 Vital status not updated: consent available | 15/249 (6.0%) | 22/80 (28%) | 37/75 (49%) | 7/36 (19%) | 81/440 (18%) |
 Vital status not updated: consent not available | 0/249 (0%) | 0/80 (0%) | 10/75 (13%) | 0/36 (0%) | 10/440 (2.3%) |
Disposition of those who were truly LTFU (N1a + D2 in Fig. 1) | |||||
 Vital status updated by manual records review | 11/233 (4.7%) | 0/79 (0%) | 2/74 (2.7%) | 11/36 (31%) | 24/422 (5.7%) |
 Vital status updated by phone contact alone | 83/233 (36%) | 10/79 (13%) | 3/74 (4.1%) | 15/36 (42%) | 111/422 (26%) |
 Vital status updated by physical tracking | 124/233 (53%) | 47/79 (59%) | 22/74 (30%) | 3/36 (8.3%) | 196/422 (46%) |
 Vital status not updated: consent available | 15/233 (6.4%) | 22/79 (28%) | 37/74 (50%) | 7/36 (19%) | 81/422 (19%) |
 Vital status not updated: consent not available | 0/233 (0%) | 0/79 (0%) | 10/74 (14%) | 0/36 (0%) | 10/422 (2.4%) |
Disposition of those truly LTFU not found by manual records review (D2 in Fig. 1) | |||||
 Vital status updated by phone contact alone | 83/222 (37%) | 10/79 (13%) | 3/72 (4.2%) | 15/25 (60%) | 111/398 (28%) |
 Vital status updated by physical tracking | 124/222 (56%) | 47/79 (59%) | 22/72 (31%) | 3/25 (12%) | 196/398 (49%) |
 Vital status not updated: consent available | 15/222 (6.8%) | 22/79 (28%) | 37/72 (51%) | 7/25 (28%) | 81/398 (20%) |
 Vital status not updated: consent not available | 0/222 (0%) | 0/79 (0%) | 10/72 (14%) | 0/25 (0%) | 10/398 (2.5%) |
Disposition of those truly LTFU who were physically sought after in the community (D3 in Fig. 1) | |||||
 Vital status updated by physical tracking | 124/131 (95%) | 47/69 (68%) | 22/35 (63%) | 3/8 (38%) | 196/243 (81%) |
 Vital status not updated | 7/131 (5.3%) | 22/69 (32%) | 13/35 (37%) | 5/8 (63%) | 47/243 (19%) |
Success of tracking using combination of methods among those who consented and had sufficient information for tracking | |||||
 Records, phone contact & physical trackinga | 218/225 (97%) | 57/79 (72%) | 27/40 (68%) | 29/34 (85%) | 331/378 (88%) |
 Phone contact & physical trackingb | 207/214 (97%) | 57/79 (72%) | 25/38 (66%) | 18/23 (78%) | 307/354 (87%) |