Repeatability of RRate measurements in children during triage in two Ugandan hospitals

PLOS Glob Public Health. 2025 Jan 7;5(1):e0003097. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0003097. eCollection 2025.

Abstract

Pneumonia is the leading cause of death in children globally. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) pneumonia diagnosis relies on accurate assessment of respiratory rate, which can be unreliable when completed by nurses with less-advanced training. To inform more accurate measurements, we investigate the repeatability of the RRate app used by nurses in Ugandan district hospitals. This secondary analysis included 3,679 children aged 0-5 years. The dataset had two sequential measurements of respiratory rate collected by 14 nurses using the RRate app. We measured agreement between respiratory rate observations while indicating observations' clustering around WHO fast-breathing thresholds. WHO thresholds are 60 breaths per minute (bpm) for under two months (Age-1), 50 bpm for two to 12 months (Age-2), and 40 bpm for 12.1 to 60 months (Age-3). We assessed the repeatability of the paired measurements per user through the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and calculated an overall ICC value. The respiratory rate measurement took less than 15 seconds for 7,277 (98.9%) of the measurements. Despite respiratory rates clustering around WHO thresholds, breathing classification based on the thresholds (Fast vs normal) was altered between sequential measurements in only 12.6% of children. The mean (SD) respiratory rate by age group was 60 (13.1) bpm for Age-1, 49 (11.9) bpm for Age-2, and 38 (10.1) for Age-3, and the bias (Limits of Agreements) were 0.3 (-10.8-11.3) bpm, 0.4 (-8.5-9.3) bpm, and 0.1 (-6.8, 7.0) bpm for Age-1, Age-2, and Age-3 respectively. The repeatability of the paired respiratory rate measurements was high, with an ICC ≥ 90% for 12 of 14 users and an overall ICC value (95% CI) of 0.95 (0.94-0.95). The RRate measurements were efficient and repeatable. The simplicity, repeatability, and efficiency support its usage in LMICs healthcare facilities, and endorses a more widespread clinical adoption.

Grants and funding

This research was supported by the Wellcome Trust Innovator Award (ID: 215695/B/19/Z), Co-PI: JMA, Co-PI: SA. Salary contributions to: IAAI, JK, CK, YP, SN, NK; Grand Challenges Canada (grant code: 2008-35944), PI: NK. Salary Contributions to: IAAI, JK, CK, NK, DD; Mining4Life (https://mining4life.org/), Co-PI: JMA, Co-PI NK and BC Children’s Hospital Foundation. Salary contributions to: IAAI, JK, CK, NK, DD, SN; Michael Smith Health Research BC Trainee Award (RT-2022-2583). Salary contributions to: YP; Michael Smith Health Research BC Scholar Award (SCH-2021-1581). Salary contribution to: MW; Mitacs Accelerate, PI: JMA. Salary contributions to: AA; Sepsis Canada. Salary contributions to: AA, and BioTalent Canada. Salary contributions to: AA. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.