Trauma Registry Implementation in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review of Characteristics, Data Quality, Barriers, and Facilitators
This systematic review of 21 studies across 11 Sub-Saharan African countries reveals that while electronic and hybrid trauma registries are increasingly implemented, their effectiveness is currently hindered by critical data gaps, infrastructure deficits, and staffing shortages, necessitating policy mandates, workflow-integrated offline platforms, and dedicated non-clinical staff to ensure sustainable, high-quality trauma care systems.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
Every year, injuries from car crashes, falls, violence, and burns claim the lives of millions of people around the world. In many parts of the globe, these accidents are the leading cause of death for young people, a toll that often exceeds the combined deaths from malaria, HIV, and tuberculosis. While high-income nations have spent decades building organized systems to treat these injuries—systems that rely on specialized hospitals and trained teams—a different reality plays out across Sub-Saharan Africa. Here, the burden of injury is immense, yet the tools to measure and improve care are often missing. To fix a broken system, you first need to know exactly where it is broken. This is the purpose of a trauma registry: a structured record that tracks every patient who arrives at a hospital with an injury, noting who they are, how they were hurt, what treatment they received, and whether they survived. Without these records, doctors are flying blind, unable to see patterns or prove that a new treatment works.
A team of researchers set out to understand the state of these life-saving records across Sub-Saharan Africa. They did not just look at whether registries existed; they examined how they were built, how well they worked, and why so many of them struggled to survive. By reviewing twenty-one studies from eleven different countries, they painted a picture of a region in transition. The researchers found that while the move toward digital record-keeping is growing, the foundation is often shaky. They discovered that the biggest obstacle is not a lack of technology, but a lack of the right people and the right way to fit data collection into the daily rush of a busy hospital.
The review, which covered research published between 2015 and 2025, revealed a hopeful shift. In the past, most injury records in the region were written on paper, a method that is slow and prone to losing information. Today, the majority of active registries use electronic systems or a mix of paper and digital tools. Many of these systems run on software that can work without an internet connection, a crucial feature for hospitals where power outages and poor connectivity are common. However, the researchers found that having a computer is not enough. The quality of the data depends entirely on who is entering it and when.
In the best-performing hospitals, the data is collected by dedicated staff whose only job is to record information. These are not doctors or nurses who are trying to save lives while also filling out forms; they are data clerks who ensure every detail is captured accurately. In these settings, the records are complete and reliable enough to guide hospital policy. For example, in one South African hospital, a dedicated team helped turn a simple data log into a tool that reduced errors in diagnosing shock and hypothermia. In another case, data showing that very few patients arrived by ambulance led the government to buy forty-one new ambulances and send doctors for emergency training.
But for every success story, there are many more where the system is failing. The researchers found that in most hospitals, the task of recording data falls to the doctors and nurses who are already overwhelmed with patient care. When a doctor is busy stabilizing a patient with a head injury, they cannot stop to type in a blood pressure reading or a breathing rate. As a result, the most critical numbers are often missing. In one registry, the systolic blood pressure—a vital sign that tells doctors if a patient is in shock—was missing for nearly all patients. In another, the breathing rate was recorded for fewer than one in four patients. Without these numbers, the registry cannot tell doctors which patients are the most at risk, and it cannot be used to improve care.
The study also highlighted a cycle of fragility that threatens the future of these systems. Most of the registries reviewed were started with money from outside research grants. When the grant money ran out, the registries often collapsed. The researchers noted that three of the systems they studied had already been discontinued for this reason. The problem is not just the lack of funds, but the lack of ownership. When a hospital administration does not see the registry as part of its own daily work, but rather as an outside research project, they are unlikely to keep it going once the external support leaves. The most sustainable systems are those where data collection is woven into the normal flow of patient care, where filling out the form is as natural as writing a prescription.
The researchers were careful to point out that their findings are limited by the quality of the studies they reviewed. Many of the original reports did not provide enough detail to judge their accuracy, and the review was restricted to English-language publications, meaning some efforts in French-speaking countries were missed. Despite these gaps, the pattern was clear. The technology to track injuries exists, and the potential to save lives is real. But the path forward requires more than just new software. It requires a shift in how hospitals are run, ensuring that someone is always available to record the data, and that the health system itself demands that this information be kept. Until these structural changes happen, trauma registries in the region will remain fragile tools, useful for research but unable to fully support the daily work of saving lives.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.