Search

Background Health care professional migration continues to challenge countries where the lack of surgical and anesthesia specialists results in being unable to address the global burden of surgical disease in their populations. Medical migration is particularly damaging to health care systems that are just beginning to scale up capacity building of human resources for health. Anesthesiologists are scarce in low-resource settings. Defining reasons why anesthesiologists leave their country of training through in-depth interviews may provide guidance to policy makers and academic organizations on how to retain valuable health professionals. Methods There were 24 anesthesiologists eligible to participate in this qualitative interview study, 15 of whom are currently practicing in Rwanda and 9 had left the country. From the eligible group, interviews were conducted with 13 currently practicing in Rwanda and 2 who had left to practice elsewhere. In-depth interviews of approximately 60 minutes were used to define themes influencing retention and migration among anesthesiologists in Rwanda. Interviews were conducted using a semistructured guide and continued until theoretical sufficiency was reached. Thematic analysis was done by 4 members of the research team using open coding to inductively identify themes. Results Interpretation of results used the framework categorizing themes into push, pull, stick, and stay to describe factors that influence migration, or the potential for migration, of anesthesiologists in Rwanda. While adequate salary is essential to retention of anesthesiologists in Rwanda, other factors such as lack of equipment and medication for safe anesthesia, isolation, and demoralization are strong push factors. Conversely, a rich academic life and optimism for the future encourage anesthesiologists to stay. Conclusions Our study suggests that better clinical resources and equipment, a more supportive community of practice, and advocacy by mentors and academic partners could encourage more staff anesthesiologists to stay and work in Rwanda.

Background A massive hemorrhage protocol (MHP) enables rapid delivery of blood components in a patient who is exsanguinating pending definitive hemorrhage control, but there is variability in MHP implementation rates, content and compliance owing to challenges presented by infrequent activation, variable team performance and patient acuity. The goal of this project was to identify the key evidence-based principles and quality indicators required to develop a standardized regional MHP. Methods A modified Delphi consensus technique was performed in the spring and summer of 2018. Panellists used survey links to independently review and rate (on a 7-point Likert scale) 43 statements and 8 quality indicators drafted by a steering committee composed of transfusion medicine specialists and technologists, and trauma physicians. External stakeholder input from all hospitals in Ontario was sought. Results Three rounds were held with 36 experts from diverse clinical backgrounds. Consensus was reached for 42 statements and 8 quality indicators. Additional modifications from external stakeholders were incorporated to form the foundation for the proposed MHP. Interpretation This MHP template will provide the basis for the design of an MHP toolkit, including specific recommendations for pediatric and obstetrical patients, and for hospitals with limited availability of blood components or means to achieve definitive hemorrhage control. We believe that harmonization of MHPs in our region will simplify training, increase uptake of evidence-based interventions, enhance communication, improve patient comfort and safety, and, ultimately, improve patient outcomes.

Safe anesthesia care is challenging in developing countries where there are shortages of personnel, drugs, equipment, and training. Anesthetists' Non-technical Skills (ANTS)-task management, team working, situation awareness, and decision making-are difficult to practice well in this context. Cesarean delivery is the most common surgical procedure in sub-Saharan Africa. This pilot study investigates whether a low-cost simulation model, with good psychological fidelity, can be used effectively to teach ANTS during cesarean delivery in Rwanda.Study participants were anesthesia providers working in a tertiary referral hospital in Rwanda. Baseline observations were conducted for 20 anesthesia providers during cesarean delivery using the established ANTS framework. After the first observation set was complete, participants were randomly assigned to either simulation intervention or control groups. The simulation intervention group underwent ANTS training using low-cost high psychological fidelity simulation with debriefing. No training was offered to the control group. Postintervention observations were then conducted in the same manner as the baseline observations.The primary outcome was the overall ANTS score (maximum, 16). The median (range) ANTS score of the simulation group was 13.5 (11-16). The ANTS score of the control group was 8 (8-9), with a statistically significant difference (P = .002). Simulation participants showed statistically significant improvement in subcategories and in the overall ANTS score compared with ANTS score before simulation exposure.Rwandan anesthesia providers show improvement in ANTS practice during cesarean delivery after 1 teaching session using a low-cost high psychological fidelity simulation model with debriefing.

Background: The cornerstone of a massive hemorrhage protocol (MHP) is the rapid delivery of blood components to mitigate the consequences of hemorrhagic shock, coagulopathy, and hypothermia in the exsanguinating patient pending definitive hemorrhage control. MHPs are used to facilitate protocol activation/termination, mobilize an interdisciplinary team, provide immediate access to blood, prioritize rapid blood testing, and commence hypothermia-prevention strategies. Non-randomized, before-after implementation studies have found an association between MHPs and improved patient outcomes, including mortality. There is variability in MHP implementation rates, content, and protocol compliance due to challenges presented by infrequent activation, variable team performance, and patient acuity. Methods: We used a modified Delphi technique to establish the framework for a standardized Provincial MHP toolkit and develop quality indicators. We assembled a panel of 36 content experts to represent relevant stakeholders at 150 Ontario hospitals. Panelists included physicians, nurses, and technologists from anesthesia, trauma, obstetrics, hematology, transfusion, emergency, transport, critical care, as well as representation by blood suppliers and patients. The group represented the diverse geographic healthcare program including academic, pediatric, suburban, and small rural hospitals. Panelists were required to attend a two-day MHP forum and complete all rounds of the Delphi. Panelists used digital surveys (LimeSurvey, Hamburg, Germany) to independently review 43 statements and 8 quality indicators drafted by a steering committee. Each statement was rated on a 7-point Likert scale from "definitely should not" to "definitely should include". Disposition of items was based on critieria determined a priori on the median Likert score. Round 1: (1) score at least >5.5 incorporated as written, (2) 2.6-5.4, discussed at the forum with all panelists, with a 2nd round revision, (3) 5.5, accepted, (2) 2.4-5.4, rewritten and sent for round 3, (3) Results: After 3 rounds, consensus was reached for 42 statements and 8 quality indicators. A 100% response rate was achieved from panelists in all three rounds. There were four main areas that required additional rounds and major modifications: (1) selection of the name of the protocol; (2) selection of the laboratory resuscitation targets; (3) determination of the pack configurations; and, (4) clarification of the role of rVIIa. The obstacle to selecting a unified name for the protocol was that many of the hospitals already had longstanding MHPs with specific names. Consensus on the laboratory targets and pack configuration was achieved by splitting statements into sub-sections. The rVIIa statement required three rounds of review to ensure the phrasing satisfied all the panelists for this controversial therapy. Interpretation: We believe that harmonization of MHPs in our region will simplify training, increase uptake of evidence-based interventions, enhance communication, improve patient safety, and ultimately improve outcomes. We highlight areas that need additional study: (1) RCTs are needed to determine if MHPs improve patient outcomes. (2) A "streamlined" version for community hospitals for stabilization before transfer to a tertiary care centre must be tested. (3) Activation and termination criteria have not been validated. (4) The frequency and type of laboratory testing has not been investigated. (5) Laboratory targets for resuscitation must be tested. (6) Does maintaining normothermia decrease transfusion? (7) Can fibrinogen concentrates and PCCs can be considered equivalent to cryoprecipitate and plasma, respectively? (8) Does compliance with the selected quality indicators result in improved outcome? These MHP recommendations will provide the basis for the design of local MHPs including specific recommendations for pediatric patients and for hospitals where definitive hemorrhage control may not be available. Disclosures Arnold: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Rigel: Consultancy, Research Funding; Principia: Consultancy. Pai:Novartis: Honoraria. Sholzberg:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Baxalta: Honoraria, Research Funding; Baxter: Honoraria, Research Funding. Zeller:Canadian Blood Services: Consultancy; Pfizer: Other: Advisory Board; Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care: Consultancy. Pavenski:Ablynx: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bioverativ: Research Funding; Shire: Honoraria; Alexion: Honoraria, Research Funding; Octapharma: Research Funding.