Search

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence that formalized trauma systems enhance patient functional outcomes and decrease mortality rates, there remains a lack of such systems globally. Critical to trauma systems are the equipment, materials, and supplies needed to support care, which vary in availability regionally. The purpose of the present study was to identify essential resources for musculoskeletal trauma care across diverse resource settings worldwide. METHODS: The modified Delphi method was utilized, with 3 rounds of electronic surveys. Respondents consisted of 1 surgeon with expertise in musculoskeletal trauma per country. Participants were identified with use of the AO Trauma, AO Alliance, Orthopaedic Trauma Association, and European Society for Trauma and Emergency Surgery networks. Respondents rated resources on a Likert scale from 1 (most important) to 9 (least important). The most essential resources were classified as those rated ≤2 by ≥75% of the sampled group. RESULTS: One hundred and three of 111 invited surgeons completed the first survey and were included throughout the subsequent rounds (representing a 93% response rate). Most participants were fellowship-trained (78%) trauma and orthopaedic surgeons (90%) practicing in an academic setting (62%), and 46% had >20 years of experience. Respondents represented low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs; 35%), upper-middle income countries (UMICs; 30%), and high-income countries (HICs; 35%). The initial survey identified 308 unique resources for pre-hospital, in-hospital, and post-hospital phases of care, of which 71 resources achieved consensus as the most essential. There was a significant difference (p < 0.0167) in ratings between income groups for 16 resources, all of which were related to general trauma care rather than musculoskeletal injury management. CONCLUSIONS: There was agreement on a core list of essential musculoskeletal trauma care resources by respondents from LMICs, UMICs, and HICs. All significant differences in resource ratings were related to general trauma management. This study represents a first step toward establishing international consensus and underscores the need to prioritize resources that are locally available. The information can be used to develop effective guidelines and policies, create best-practice treatment standards, and advocate for necessary resources worldwide. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study utilized the Delphi method representing expert opinion; however, this work did not examine patient management and therefore does not have a clinical Level of Evidence.

BackgroundWhile the global burden of musculoskeletal injury is increasingly recognized, few epidemiologic studies have specifically recorded its incidence or prevalence, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Understanding the burden of musculoskeletal injury relative to other health conditions is critical to effective allocation of resources to mitigate the disability that results from trauma. The current study aims to systematically review the existing primary literature on the incidence and prevalence of pelvic and appendicular fractures, a major component of musculoskeletal injury, in low- and lower-middle income countries (LMICs).MethodsThis study conforms to the systematic review and traditional meta-analysis guidelines outlined in the PRISMA-P statement. Incidence rates were calculated as the occurrence of new fracture cases per 100,000 person-years, and prevalence as total fracture cases per population sample, reported as percentages.ResultsThe literature search yielded 3497 total citations. There were 21 full-text articles, representing 14 different countries, selected for data extraction. Included studies reported a wide range of incidence and prevalence rates, with an overall mean fracture incidence ranging from 779 (95% CI: 483.0-1188.7) to 1574 (95% CI: 1285.1-1915.1) per 100,000 person-years.ConclusionBetter understanding the unmet burden of musculoskeletal injury in LMICs is critical to effectively allocating resources and advocating for underserved populations. To address existing gaps and heterogeneity within the literature, future research should incorporate population-based sampling with broader geographic representation in LMICs to more accurately capture the burden of disease.

BackgroundWhile the global burden of musculoskeletal injury is increasingly recognized, few epidemiologic studies have specifically recorded its incidence or prevalence, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Understanding the burden of musculoskeletal injury relative to other health conditions is critical to effective allocation of resources to mitigate the disability that results from trauma. The current study aims to systematically review the existing primary literature on the incidence and prevalence of pelvic and appendicular fractures, a major component of musculoskeletal injury, in low- and lower-middle income countries (LMICs).MethodsThis study conforms to the systematic review and traditional meta-analysis guidelines outlined in the PRISMA-P statement. Incidence rates were calculated as the occurrence of new fracture cases per 100,000 person-years, and prevalence as total fracture cases per population sample, reported as percentages.ResultsThe literature search yielded 3497 total citations. There were 21 full-text articles, representing 14 different countries, selected for data extraction. Included studies reported a wide range of incidence and prevalence rates, with an overall mean fracture incidence ranging from 779 (95% CI: 483.0-1188.7) to 1574 (95% CI: 1285.1-1915.1) per 100,000 person-years.ConclusionBetter understanding the unmet burden of musculoskeletal injury in LMICs is critical to effectively allocating resources and advocating for underserved populations. To address existing gaps and heterogeneity within the literature, future research should incorporate population-based sampling with broader geographic representation in LMICs to more accurately capture the burden of disease.

Background: In low and middle-income countries like Ghana, out-of-pocket (OOP) payments remain a significant barrier to healthcare access, often leading to catastrophic health expenditures (CHE). This study evaluates the incidence of CHE among patients treated for long bone fractures at Ghana's major teaching hospitals, providing insight into the economic burdens faced by these patients. Methods: This cross-sectional study analyzed data from 2,980 patients with long bone fractures treated at four major teaching hospitals in Ghana from July 2017 to July 2020. We collected demographic, clinical, and economic data, including OOP payments and patient-reported income, to assess the incidence of CHE at varying income thresholds (10%, 20%, 30%, 40%). Logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of CHE, with variables including age, gender, education, region, fracture type, injury severity, and NHIS coverage. Results: The incidence of CHE was highest at the 10% income threshold (53.21%) and decreased with higher thresholds. Male patients incurred higher average OOP payments ($343.68) than females ($271.63), and patients with tibia fractures faced the highest financial burden. Educational and regional disparities were evident, with lower CHE rates among patients with higher educational attainment and those from northern regions. NHIS coverage provided limited financial relief, particularly at lower income thresholds. Conclusion: Long bone fractures impose a substantial financial burden on patients in Ghana, with significant gender, educational, and regional disparities in OOP payments and CHE. While NHIS provides some relief, it remains inadequate in protecting patients from financial distress. Policy interventions aimed at expanding NHIS coverage, reducing OOP payments for high-cost treatments, and addressing geographic inequities are urgently needed to improve financial protection for patients with long bone fractures in Ghana. Future research should focus on capturing long-term financial impacts and improving income data accuracy to better inform healthcare policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Few studies evaluated the use of Household Disinfectant and Cleaning Products (HDCPs) during the COVID-19 pandemic, but no population-based cohorts used longitudinal data. We studied changes in HDCPs during the first lockdown, based on longitudinal data from the French population-based NutriNet-Santé and CONSTANCES cohorts. Methods: Based on standardized questionnaires on household cleaning tasks in 2018–2019 and around the first lockdown in France (March17-May3 2020), we compared the duration of weekly use of HDCPs (< 1 day/week, < 10 min/week; 10-30 min/week; > 30 min/week) and the household cleaning help (yes/no) before and during the lockdown period by Bhapkar and McNemar's tests. Moreover, we assessed self-reported changes in the frequency of HDCPs during the lockdown from before (unchanged/increased). Results: Analyses were carried on 31,105 participants of NutriNet-Santé (48 years, 75% women, 81% ≥ high school diploma) and 49,491 of CONSTANCES (47 years, 51% women, 87% ≥ high school diploma). During the lockdown, compared with 2018–2019, duration of HDCPs use increased (> 30 min; NutriNet-Santé: 44% versus 18%; CONSTANCES: 63% versus 16%) and household help decreased (NutriNet-Santé: 5% versus 40%; CONSTANCES: 3% versus 56%). Regarding the frequency of HDCPs use, 55% of participants of NutriNet-Santé (57% women/49% men) and 83% of CONSTANCES (86% women/81% men) reported an increased use since the beginning of the lockdown, significantly higher among women (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: The frequency and duration of weekly use of HDCPs has significantly increased since the pandemic. As the use of HDCPs is associated with health issues, further studies are now needed to evaluate the potential health impacts of these changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]