Search

Objective: The safety and effectiveness of task-sharing (TS) in neurosurgery, delegating clinical roles to non-neurosurgeons, is not well understood. This study evaluated an ongoing TS model in the Philippines, where neurosurgical workforce deficits are compounded with a large neurotrauma burden. Methods: Medical records from emergency neurosurgical admissions to 2 hospitals were reviewed (January 2015–June 2018): Bicol Medical Center (BMC), a government hospital in which emergency neurosurgery is chiefly performed by general surgery residents (TS providers), and Mother Seton Hospital, an adjacent private hospital where neurosurgery consultants are the primary surgeons. Univariable and multivariable linear and logistic regression compared provider-associated outcomes. Results: Of 214 emergency neurosurgery operations, TS providers performed 95 and neurosurgeons, 119. TS patients were more often male (88.4% vs. 73.1%; P = 0.007), younger (mean age, 27.6 vs. 50.5 years; P < 0.001), and had experienced road traffic accidents (69.1% vs. 31.4%; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores on admission. Provider type was not associated with mortality (neurosurgeons, 20.2%; TS, 17.9%; P = 0.68), reoperation, or pneumonia. No significant differences were observed for GCS improvement between admission and discharge or in-hospital GCS improvement, including or excluding inpatient deaths. TS patients had shorter lengths of stay (17.3 days vs. 24.4 days; coefficient, −6.67; 95% confidence interval, −13.01 to −0.34; P

Background: Because nearly 23,000 more neurosurgeons are needed globally to address 5 million essential neurosurgical cases that go untreated each year, there is an increasing interest in task-shifting and task-sharing (TS/S), delegating neurosurgical tasks to nonspecialists, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This global survey aimed to provide a cross-sectional understanding of the prevalence and structure of current neurosurgical TS/S practices in LMICs. Methods: The survey was distributed to a convenience sample of individuals providing neurosurgical care in LMICs with a Web-based survey link via electronic mailing lists of continental societies and various neurosurgical groups, conference announcements, e-mailing lists, and social media platforms. Country-level data were analyzed by descriptive statistics. Results: The survey yielded 127 responses from 47 LMICs; 20 countries (42.6%) reported ongoing TS/S. Most TS/S procedures involved emergency interventions, the top 3 being burr holes, craniotomy for hematoma evacuation, and external ventricular drain. Most (65.0%) believed that their Ministry of Health does not endorse TS/S (24.0% unsure), and only 11% believed that TS/S training was structured. There were few opportunities for TS/S providers to continue medical education (11.6%) or maintenance of certification (9.4%, or receive remuneration (4.2%). Conclusions: TS/S is ongoing in many LMICs without substantial structure or oversight, which is concerning for patient safety. These data invite future clinical outcomes studies to assess effectiveness and discussions on policy recommendations such as standardized curricula, certification protocols, specialist oversight, and referral networks to increase the level of TS/S care and to continue to increase the specialist workforce. Key words: Capacity, Global health, Global neurosurgery, LMIC, Task-sharing, Task-shifting, Workforce