Search

Introduction: The burden of injuries globally and in Malawi is substantial. Optimising both access to, and quality of, care in health systems requires attention. We aimed to establish how health facility staff in Karonga, Malawi, perceive barriers to seeking (delay 1), reaching (delay 2) and receiving (delay 3) injury care. Method: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of health facility staff who treat patients with injuries in all health facilities serving the Karonga Demographic Surveillance Site population. The primary outcome was participant perceptions of the importance of delays 1 to 3 following injury. Secondary outcomes were the barriers within each of these delays considered most important and which were considered the most important across all delays stages. Results: 228 staff completed the survey: 36.8% (84/228) were female and 61.4% (140/228) reported being involved in caring for an injured person at least weekly. Delay 3 was most frequently considered the most important delay 35.1% (80/228), with 19.3% (44/228) and 16.6% (38/228) reporting delays 1 and 2 as the most important respectively; 28.9% (66/228) of respondents either did not know or answer. For delay 1 the barrier, "the perceived financial costs associated with seeking care are too great", was considered most important. For delay 2, the barrier "lack of timely affordable emergency transport (formal or informal)" was considered most important. For delay 3, the barrier, "lack of reliably available necessary physical resources (infrastructure, equipment and consumable material)" was considered most important. When considering the most important overall barrier across all delays, the delay 3 barrier, "lack of reliably available necessary physical resources" received the most nominations (41.7% [95/228]). Conclusions: Given the awareness of health facility staff of the issues facing their patients, these findings should assist in informing health system planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Indicators to evaluate progress towards timely access to safe surgical, anaesthesia, and obstetric (SAO) care were proposed in 2015 by the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery. These aimed to capture access to surgery, surgical workforce, surgical volume, perioperative mortality rate, and catastrophic and impoverishing financial consequences of surgery. Despite being rapidly taken up by practitioners, data points from which to derive the indicators were not defined, limiting comparability across time or settings. We convened global experts to evaluate and explicitly define-for the first time-the indicators to improve comparability and support achievement of 2030 goals to improve access to safe affordable surgical and anaesthesia care globally. Methods and findings The Utstein process for developing and reporting guidelines through a consensus building process was followed. In-person discussions at a 2-day meeting were followed by an iterative process conducted by email and virtual group meetings until consensus was reached. The meeting was held between June 16 to 18, 2019; discussions continued until August 2020. Participants consisted of experts in surgery, anaesthesia, and obstetric care, data science, and health indicators from high-, middle-, and low-income countries. Considering each of the 6 indicators in turn, we refined overarching descriptions and agreed upon data points needed for construction of each indicator at current time (basic data points), and as each evolves over 2 to 5 (intermediate) and >5 year (full) time frames. We removed one of the original 6 indicators (one of 2 financial risk protection indicators was eliminated) and refined descriptions and defined data points required to construct the 5 remaining indicators: geospatial access, workforce, surgical volume, perioperative mortality, and catastrophic expenditure. A strength of the process was the number of people from global institutes and multilateral agencies involved in the collection and reporting of global health metrics; a limitation was the limited number of participants from low- or middle-income countries-who only made up 21% of the total attendees. Conclusions To track global progress towards timely access to quality SAO care, these indicators-at the basic level-should be implemented universally as soon as possible. Intermediate and full indicator sets should be achieved by all countries over time. Meanwhile, these evolutions can assist in the short term in developing national surgical plans and collecting more detailed data for research studies., Author(s): Justine I. Davies 1,2,3,*, Adrian W. Gelb 4,5, Julian Gore-Booth 4, Janet Martin 6, Jannicke Mellin-Olsen 4,7, Christina Åkerman 8,9, Emmanuel A. Ameh 10,11, Bruce M. Biccard 12,13, Geir [...]

Author(s): Anna J. Dare 1, Katherine C. Lee 2, Josh Bleicher 2, Alex E. Elobu 3, Thaim B. Kamara 4, Osborne Liko 5, Samuel Luboga 6, Akule Danlop 5, Gabriel [...], Background Little is known about the social and political factors that influence priority setting for different health services in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), yet these factors are integral to understanding how national health agendas are established. We investigated factors that facilitate or prevent surgical care from being prioritized in LMICs. Methods and Findings We undertook country case studies in Papua New Guinea, Uganda, and Sierra Leone, using a qualitative process-tracing method. We conducted 74 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders involved in health agenda setting and surgical care in these countries. Interviews were triangulated with published academic literature, country reports, national health plans, and policies. Data were analyzed using a conceptual framework based on four components (actor power, ideas, political contexts, issue characteristics) to assess national factors influencing priority for surgery. Political priority for surgical care in the three countries varies. Priority was highest in Papua New Guinea, where surgical care is firmly embedded within national health plans and receives significant domestic and international resources, and much lower in Uganda and Sierra Leone. Factors influencing whether surgical care was prioritized were the degree of sustained and effective domestic advocacy by the local surgical community, the national political and economic environment in which health policy setting occurs, and the influence of international actors, particularly donors, on national agenda setting. The results from Papua New Guinea show that a strong surgical community can generate priority from the ground up, even where other factors are unfavorable. Conclusions National health agenda setting is a complex social and political process. To embed surgical care within national health policy, sustained advocacy efforts, effective framing of the problem and solutions, and country-specific data are required. Political, technical, and financial support from regional and international partners is also important.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text Objective: Surgical site infection (SSI) prevention remains significant, particularly in the era of antimicrobial resistance. Feedback on practices and outcomes is known to be key to reduce SSI rates and optimize antibiotic usage. However, the optimal method, format and frequency of feedback for surgical teams remains unclear. The objective of the study is to understand how data from surveillance and audit are fed back in routine surgical practice. Methods: A systematic scoping review was conducted, using well-established implementation science frameworks to code the data. Two electronic health-oriented databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE) were searched to September 2019. We included studies that assessed the use of feedback as a strategy either in the prevention and management of SSI and/or in the use of antibiotics perioperatively. Results: We identified 21 studies: 17 focused on SSI rates and outcomes and 10 studies described antimicrobial stewardship for SSI (with some overlap in focus). Several interventions were reported, mostly multimodal with feedback as a component. Feedback was often provided in written format (62%), either individualized (38%) or in group (48%). Only 25% of the studies reported that feedback cascaded down to the frontline perioperative staff. In 65% of the studies, 1 to 5 implementation strategies were used while only 5% of the studies reported to have utilized more than 15 implementation strategies. Among studies reporting antibiotic usage in surgery, most (71%) discussed compliance with surgical antibiotic prophylaxis. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the need to provide feedback to all levels of perioperative care providers involved in patient care. Future research in this area should report implementation parameters in more detail. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To identify the implementation strategies used in World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) uptake in low- and middleincome countries (LMICs); examine any association of implementation strategies with implementation effectiveness; and to assess the clinical impact. Background: The SSC is associated with improved surgical outcomes but effective implementation strategies are poorly understood. Methods: We searched the Cochrane library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO from June 2008 to February 2019 and included primary studies on SSC use in LMICs. Coprimary objectives were identification of implementation strategies used and evaluation of associations between strategies and implementation effectiveness. To assess the clinical impact of the SSC, we estimated overall pooled relative risks for mortality and morbidity. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018100034). Results: We screened 1562 citations and included 47 papers. Median number of discrete implementation strategies used per study was 4 (IQR: 1–14, range 0–28). No strategies were identified in 12 studies. SSC implementation occurred with high penetration (81%, SD 20%) and fidelity (85%, SD 13%), but we did not detect an association between implementation strategies and implementation outcomes. SSC use was associated with a reduction in mortality (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.67–0.89), all complications (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.45–0.71) and infectious complications (RR 0.44; 95% CI 0.37–0.52). Conclusions: The SSC is used with high fidelity and penetration is associated with improved clinical outcomes in LMICs. Implementation appears well supported by a small number of tailored strategies. Further application of implementation science methodology is required among the global surgical community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined the views of providers and users of the surgical system in Freetown, Sierra Leone on processes of care, job and service satisfaction and barriers to achieving quality and accessible care, focusing particularly on the main public tertiary hospital in Freetown and two secondary and six primary sites from which patients are referred to it. We conducted interviews with health care providers (N = 66), service users (n = 24) and people with a surgical condition who had chosen not to use the public surgical system (N = 13), plus two focus groups with health providers in primary care (N = 10 and N = 10). The overall purpose of the study was to understand perceptions on processes of and barriers to care from a variety of perspectives, to recommend interventions to improve access and quality of care as part of a larger study. Our research suggests that providers perceive their relationships with patients to be positive, while the majority of patients see the opposite: that many health workers are unapproachable and uncaring, particularly towards poorer patients who are unable or unwilling to pay staff extra in the form of informal payments for their care. Many health care providers note the importance of lack of recognition shown to them by their superiors and the health system in general. We suggest that this lack of recognition underlies poor morale, leading to poor care. Any intervention to improve the system should therefore consider staff-patient relations as a key element in its design and implementation, and ideally be led and supported by frontline healthcare workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Over 5 billion people in the world do not have access to safe, affordable surgical and anaesthesia care when needed. In order to improve health outcomes in patients with surgical conditions, both access to care and the quality of care need to be improved. A recent commission on high-quality health systems highlighted that poor-quality care is now a bigger barrier than nonutilisation of the health system for reducing mortality. Aim To carry out a systematic review to provide an evidence-based summary of hospital-based interventions associated with improved quality of surgical and anaesthesia care in sub-Saharan African countries (SSACs). Methods and analysis Three search strings (1) surgery and anaesthesia, (2) quality improvement hospital-based interventions and (3) SSACs will be combined. The following databases EMBASE, Global Health, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science and Scopus will be searched. Further relevant studies will be identified from national and international health organisations and publications and reference lists of all selected full-text articles. The review will include all type of original articles in English published between 2008 and 2019. Article screening, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality will be done by two reviewers independently and any disputes will be resolved by a third reviewer or team consensus. Three types of outcomes will be collected including clinical, process and implementation outcomes. The primary outcome will be mortality. Secondary outcomes will include other clinical outcomes (major and minor complications), as well as process and implementation outcomes. Descriptive statistics and outcomes will be summarised and discussed. For the primary outcome, the methodological rigour will be assessed. Ethics and dissemination The results will be published in a peer reviewed open access journal and presented at national and international conferences. As this is a review of secondary data no formal ethical approval is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Existing data suggest a large burden of surgical conditions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, surgical care for children in LMICs remains poorly understood. Our goal was to define the hospital infrastructure, workforce, and delivery of surgical care for children across Somaliland and provide policy guidance to improve care. Methods: We used two established hospital assessment tools to assess infrastructure, workforce, and capacity at all hospitals providing surgical care for children across Somaliland. We collected data on all surgical procedures performed in children in Somaliland between August 2016 and July 2017 using operative logbooks. Results: Data were collected from 15 hospitals, including eight government, five for-profit, and two not-for-profit hospitals. Children represented 15.9% of all admitted patients, and pediatric surgical interventions comprised 8.8% of total operations. There were 0.6 surgical providers and 1.2 anesthesia providers per 100,000 population. A total of 1255 surgical procedures were performed in children in all hospitals in Somaliland over 1 year, at a rate of 62.4 surgical procedures annually per 100,000 children. Care was concentrated at private hospitals within urban areas, with a limited number of procedures for many high-burden pediatric surgical conditions. Conclusions: We found a profound lack of surgical capacity for children in Somaliland. Hospital-level surgical infrastructure, workforce, and care delivery reflects a severely resource-constrained health system. Targeted policy to improved essential surgical care at local, regional, and national levels is essential to improve the health of children in Somaliland. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Millennium Development Goals have ended and the Sustainable Development Goals have begun, marking a shift in the global health landscape. The frame of reference has changed from a focus on 8 development priorities to an expansive set of 17 interrelated goals intended to improve the well-being of all people. In this time of change, several groups, including the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery, have brought a critical problem to the fore: 5 billion people lack access to safe, affordable surgical and anaesthesia care when needed. The magnitude of this problem and the world's new focus on strengthening health systems mandate reimagined roles for and renewed commitments from high income country actors in global surgery. To discuss the way forward, on 6 May 2015, the Commission held its North American launch event in Boston, Massachusetts. Panels of experts outlined the current state of knowledge and agreed on the roles of surgical colleges and academic medical centres; trainees and training programmes; academia; global health funders; the biomedical devices industry, and news media and advocacy organisations in building sustainable, resilient surgical systems. This paper summarises these discussions and serves as a consensus statement providing practical advice to these groups. It traces a common policy agenda between major actors and provides a roadmap for maximising benefit to surgical patients worldwide. To close the access gap by 2030, individuals and organisations must work collectively, interprofessionally and globally. High income country actors must abandon colonial narratives and work alongside low and middle income country partners to build the surgical systems of the future.

Cesarean section (CS) is a life‐saving procedure when performed for the right indication but carries substantial risks, specifically during subsequent pregnancies. The aim of this study was to evaluate obstetric outcomes for women 5 years after a CS performed by medical doctors and associate clinicians. This was a prospective multi‐center observational study of women who had a CS at any of nine hospitals in Sierra Leone. Women and their offspring were followed up with three home visits for 5 years after surgery. Outcomes of interest included long‐term complications, mode and place of delivery, and maternal and pediatric outcomes of subsequent pregnancies. Of the 1274 women included in the study, 140 (11.0%) were lost to follow‐up. Within 5 years after the index CS, 27.0% of the women became pregnant and 2.5% had a second pregnancy. Women with perinatal death at the index CS had 5.25 higher odds of becoming pregnant within 1 year. Of the 259 women who delivered, 31 (12.0%) had a planned CS and 228 (88.0%) attempted a trial of labor after CS, resulting in either a successful vaginal birth (n = 138; 60.5%) or an emergency CS (n = 90; 39.5%). Peripartum and long‐term complications did not significantly differ between those that were operated on by medical doctors and associate clinicians. Within 5 years after CS, one in four women became pregnant again and more than half had a vaginal delivery. Significant differences in place and mode of birth between wealth quintiles illustrate inequities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We used the process mapping method and Three Delays framework, to identify and visually represent the relationship between critical actions, decisions and barriers to access to care following injury in the Karonga health system, Northern Malawi., Design: Facilitated group process mapping workshops with summary process mapping synthesis., Setting: Process mapping workshops took place in 11 identified health system facilities (one per facility) providing injury care for a population in Karonga, Northern Malawi., Participants: Fifty-four healthcare workers from various cadres took part., Results: An overall injury health system summary map was created using those categories of action, decision and barrier that were sometimes or frequently reported. This provided a visual summary of the process following injury within the health system. For Delay 1 (seeking care) four barriers were most commonly described (by 8 of 11 facilities) these were 'cultural norms', 'healthcare literacy', 'traditional healers' and 'police processes'. For Delay 2 (reaching care) the barrier most frequently described was 'transport'-a lack of timely affordable emergency transport (formal or informal) described by all 11 facilities. For Delay 3 (receiving quality care) the most commonly reported barrier was that of 'physical resources' (9 of 11 facilities)., Conclusions: We found our novel approach combining several process mapping exercises to produce a summary map to be highly suited to rapid health system assessment identifying barriers to injury care, within a Three Delays framework. We commend the approach to others wishing to conduct rapid health system assessments in similar contexts., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The increasing incidence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) presents a global crisis to healthcare, with longstanding antimicrobial agents becoming less effective at treating and preventing infection. In the surgical setting, antibiotic prophylaxis has long been established as routine standard of care to prevent surgical site infection (SSI), which remains one of the most common hospital-acquired infections. The growing incidence of AMR increases the risk of SSI complicated with resistant bacteria, resulting in poorer surgical outcomes (prolonged hospitalisation, extended durations of antibiotic therapy, higher rates of surgical revision and mortality). Despite these increasing challenges, more data are required on approaches at the institutional and patient level to optimise surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in the era of antibiotic resistance (AR). This review provides an overview of the common resistant bacteria encountered in the surgical setting and covers wider considerations for practice to optimise surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in the perioperative setting., Competing Interests: Dr Esmita Charani reports personal fees from Pfizer, outside the submitted work. Dr Andrew JM Leather reports grants from Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2021 Menz et al.)

Background: It is known that outcomes after injury care in low-and-middle income countries (LMICs) are poorer than those in high income countries. However, little is known about healthcare provider competency to deliver quality injury care in these settings. We developed and used clinical vignettes to evaluate injury care quality in an LMIC setting., Method: Four serious injury scenarios, developed from agreed best practice, testing diagnostic and management skills, were piloted with high and low-income setting clinicians. Scenarios were used with primary and referral facility clinicians in Malawi. Participants described their clinical course of action (assessment, diagnostic, treatment and management approaches) for each scenario, registering one point per agreed best practice response. Mean percentage total scores were calculated and univariable and multivariable comparison made across provider groups, facility types, injury care frequency and training level., Results: Fourteen Doctors, 51 Clinical Officers, 20 Medical Assistants from 11 facilities participated. Mean percentage total vignette scores varied significantly with clinician provider group (Doctors 63.1% vs Clinical Officers 49.6%, p<0.001, Clinical Officers vs Medical Assistants 39.4% p=0.001). Important care aspects most frequently included or omitted were: following chest injury, 88.2% reported chest drain insertion, 7.1% checked for tracheal deviation; following penetrating abdominal injury and shock, 98.8% secured IV access, 0% mentioned tranexamic acid; following severe head injury, 88.2% proposed CT or neurosurgical transfer, 7.1% ensured normotension; and following isolated open lower leg fracture, 90.1% arranged orthopaedic consultation, 2.4% assessed distal neurological status., Conclusion: These clinical vignettes proved easy to use and collected rich data. This supports their use for assessing and monitoring clinical care quality in other similar settings., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)