Search

Background: Trauma is a leading cause of death and represents a major problem in developing countries where access to good quality emergency care is limited. Médecins Sans Frontières delivered a standard package of care in two trauma emergency departments (EDs) in different violence settings: Kunduz, Afghanistan, and Tabarre, Haiti. This study aims to assess whether this standard package resulted in similar performance in these very different contexts., Methods: A cross-sectional study using routine programme data, comparing patient characteristics and outcomes in two EDs over the course of 2014., Results: 31 158 patients presented to the EDs: 22 076 in Kunduz and 9082 in Tabarre. Patient characteristics, such as delay in presentation (29.6% over 24 h in Kunduz, compared to 8.4% in Tabarre), triage score, and morbidity pattern differed significantly between settings. Nevertheless, both EDs showed an excellent performance, demonstrating low proportions of mortality (0.1% for both settings) and left without being seen (1.3% for both settings), and acceptable triage performance. Physicians' maximum working capacity was exceeded in both centres, and mainly during rush hours., Conclusions: This study supports for the first time the plausibility of using the same ED package in different settings. Mapping of patient attendance is essential for planning of human resources needs., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.)

Background: Severe mental disorders are often neglected following a disaster. Based on Médecins Sans Frontières' (MSF) experience of providing mental health (MH) care after the 2013 typhoon in the Philippines, we describe the monthly volume of MH activities and beneficiaries; characteristics of people seeking MH care; profile and outcomes of people with severe mental disorders; prescription of psychotropic medication; and factors facilitating the identification and management of individuals with severe mental disorders., Methods: A retrospective review of programme data was carried out., Results: In total, 172 persons sought MH care. Numbers peaked three months into MSF's intervention and decreased thereafter. Of 134 (78%) people with complete data, 37 (28%) had a severe mental disorder, often characterised by psychotic symptoms (n=24, 64%) and usually unrelated to the typhoon (n=32, 86%). Four people (11%) were discharged after successful treatment, two (5%) moved out of the area, 20 (54%) were referred for follow-up on cessation of MSF activities and 10 (27%) were lost-to-follow-up. Psychotropic treatment was prescribed for 33 (75%) people with mental disorders and for 11 with non-severe mental disorders., Conclusions: This study illustrates how actors can play an important role in providing MH care for people with severe mental disorders in the aftermath of a disaster., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.)

Although user fees are a common form of healthcare financing in resource-poor countries, there is growing consensus that their use compromises health service utilisation and population health. Between 2003 and 2006, Médecins sans Frontières (MSF) conducted population-based surveys in Burundi, Sierra Leone, Democratic Republic of Congo, Chad, Haiti and Mali to determine the impact of user fees on healthcare-seeking behaviour and access. For general and disease-specific conditions, MSF also measured the impact of (i) reduced payment systems in Chad, Mali, Haiti and Burundi and (ii) user fee abolition for certain population groups in Burundi and Mali. User fees were found to result in low utilisation of public health facilities, exclusion from health care and exacerbation of impoverishment, forcing many to seek alternative care. Financial barriers affected 30-60% of people requiring health care. Exemption systems targeting vulnerable individuals proved ineffective, benefiting only 1-3.5% of populations. Alternative payment systems, requiring 'modest' fees from users (e.g. low flat fees), did not adequately improve coverage of essential health needs, especially for the poorest and most vulnerable. Conversely, user fee abolition for large population groups led to rapid increases in utilisation of health services and coverage of essential healthcare needs. Abolition of user fees appears crucial in helping to reduce existing barriers to health care. The challenge for health authorities and donor agencies is around working creatively to remove the fees while addressing the financial consequences of improved access and providing quality care.