[evaluation Of Data On Live Birth Certificates From The Information System On Live Births (sinasc) In Campinas, São Paulo, 2009].

To assess the completeness and reliability of the Information System on Live Births (Sinasc) data. A cross-sectional analysis of the reliability and completeness of Sinasc's data was performed using a sample of Live Birth Certificate (LBC) from 2009, related to births from Campinas, Southeast Brazil. For data analysis, hospitals were grouped according to category of service (Unified National Health System, private or both), 600 LBCs were randomly selected and the data were collected in LBC-copies through mothers and newborns' hospital records and by telephone interviews. The completeness of LBCs was evaluated, calculating the percentage of blank fields, and the LBCs agreement comparing the originals with the copies was evaluated by Kappa and intraclass correlation coefficients. The percentage of completeness of LBCs ranged from 99.8%-100%. For the most items, the agreement was excellent. However, the agreement was acceptable for marital status, maternal education and newborn infants' race/color, low for prenatal visits and presence of birth defects, and very low for the number of deceased children. The results showed that the municipality Sinasc is reliable for most of the studied variables. Investments in training of the professionals are suggested in an attempt to improve system capacity to support planning and implementation of health activities for the benefit of maternal and child population.

Patient education in glaucoma: what do patients know about glaucoma?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the knowledge glaucoma patients have about their disease and its treatment. METHODS: One hundred and eighty-three patients were interviewed at the Glaucoma Service of Wills Eye Hospital (Philadelphia, USA, Group 1) and 100 at the Glaucoma Service of University of Campinas (Campinas, Brazil, Group 2). An informal, relaxed atmosphere was created by the interviewer before asking a list of 18 open-ended questions. RESULTS: In Group 1, 44% of the 183 patients did not have an acceptable idea about what glaucoma is, 30% did not know the purpose of the medications they were taking, 47% were not aware of what was an average intraocular pressure, and 45% did not understand why visual fields were examined. In Group 2, 54% gave unsatisfactory answers to the question What is glaucoma?, 54% did not know the purpose of the medications they were taking, 80% were not aware of what was an average intraocular pressure, and 94% did not understand why visual fields were examined (p<0.001). Linear regression analysis demonstrated that level of education was positively correlated to knowledge about glaucoma in both groups (r=0.65, p=0.001). CONCLUSION: This study showed that patients' knowledge about glaucoma varies greatly, and that in an urban, American setting, around one third of the patients have minimal understanding, whereas in an urban setting in Brazil around two thirds of patients were lacking basic information about glaucoma. Innovative and effective methods are needed to correct this situation.