Long-Term Follow-Up of Humanitarian Surgeries: Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction in Rural Ghana

Perioperative Mortality Rate in a Low-Resource Non-governmental Organisation Setting

Introduction A significant portion of the global population lacks access to safe and affordable surgical and anaesthesia care, with the majority of those affected residing in low- and middle-income countries. As a low-middle-income country and one of the most populated nations, India faces substantial challenges in addressing this healthcare gap. We aimed to descriptively assess the perioperative mortality rate (POMR) of a low-resource non-governmental organisation hospital in India and assess the preparedness of surgical services. Methodology We performed a retrospective study by collecting the surgical volume from the operation theatre registry. All recorded deaths about surgery during the timeframe of data collection and investigated each death. We have also assessed the hospital's preparedness for surgical services. Results The operation theatre registry recorded 1,860 patients over five years who underwent major operations. The perioperative mortality was three (0.16%). The case mix done under obstetrics and gynaecology was 1,046 (56.2%), general surgery at 614 (33.0%), and orthopaedics at 200 (10.8%). After adjustment, we found that our average surgical volume per year was 448 (95% CI: 391.52-504.96). Emergency surgeries had a relative risk of 1.9 (95% CI: 0.172-20.87) higher than elective surgeries. Our situational analysis of surgical preparedness shows that Vivekananda Memorial Hospital (VMH) is a well-prepared hospital to provide 32 out of 42 essential surgeries, as described by the Disease Control Priorities. This hospital fulfilled the infrastructure and equipment required for an ideal 100-bed hospital, except for having a blood bank. Conclusion In a low-resource non-governmental organisation setting such as VMH, POMR can meet global standards. Surgical care is accessible and affordable to the poorest of the population.

Insight Into the Clinical Practices of US-Based Surgical Nongovernmental Organizations

INTRODUCTION

A growing sector of humanitarian surgical nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) is providing care in low- and middle-income countries. Minimal data exists regarding this extremely heterogeneous community. This study aims to describe the demographics and clinical practices of surgical NGOs. We hypothesize there are identifiable attributes of such organizations which correlate with success.

METHODS

A survey was sent to 83 US-based surgical NGOs directly providing general or subspecialty surgical care in low- and middle-income countries. Further information was obtained from organizations' websites. Descriptive statistics were performed to analyze organizational attributes and define protocol-driven practices.

RESULTS

Thirty NGOs (36%) responded, averaging 20 ± 11 y of operation. Annually, US humanitarian surgical organizations performed a wide range of operations (10-15,000) with 52% performing fewer than 200 operations per year. Sixty-seven percent of responders were classified as strongly protocol-driven. Only twenty percent reported deviation from standard US practice occurs often or very often, most commonly in pain management (18%), preoperative workup (16%), and operative technique (16%).

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first effort to describe the characteristics and clinical practices of the humanitarian surgical sector. There exists a wide scope of clinical practice among responding surgical NGOs, however mostly consistent with US standards, with a prevalance of protocol-driven clinical approach. Developing consensus-based protocols may help standardize and improve quality of care for surgical NGOs.

Coordination and Pilot Implementation of a Standardized Data Collection for Touching Hands

PURPOSE

Touching Hands is an American Society for Surgery of the Hand program that provides hand surgeries to the world's underserved communities. The purpose of this study was to develop and implement a systematic data collection method for Touching Hands to assess patient outcomes, volunteer impact, alleviated disease burden, and cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

Research electronic data capture (REDCap) was used as the secure software platform to facilitate data collection. The Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire was used to assess pre-and postoperative patient-reported outcomes. The Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services (Medical Personnel) survey was administered to volunteers before and after the mission to measure impact on volunteers. Case information was collected to calculate disability-adjusted life years and cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

The data collection system was implemented in some capacity in 4 domestic and 3 international mission sites during 2020 and 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial limitations exist for the implementation of a systematic data collection framework for Touching Hands and warrant further modification and optimization.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

A REDCap database can be used for standardized and centralized patient and volunteer data collection for Touching Hands missions.

Assessing the Success and Sustainability of Global Neurosurgery Collaborations: Systematic Review and Adaptation of the Framework for Assessment of InteRNational Surgical Success Criteria

BACKGROUND

The high unmet neurosurgical burden in low- and middle-income countries has necessitated multiple global neurosurgical collaborations. We identified these collaborations and their peer-reviewed journal publications and evaluated them using a modified version of the Framework for Assessment of InteRNational Surgical Success (FAIRNeSS).

METHODS

A systematic literature review yielded 265 articles describing neurosurgery-focused collaborations. A subset of 101 papers from 17 collaborations were evaluated with the modified FAIRNeSS criteria. Analysis of trends was performed for both individual articles and collaborations.

RESULTS

Most of the articles were general reviews (64), and most focused on clinical research (115). The leading collaboration focus was workforce and infrastructure development (45%). Composite FAIRNeSS scores ranged from 7/34 to 30/34. Average FAIRNeSS scores for individual articles ranged from 0.25 to 26.75, while collaboration-wide FAIRNeSS score averages ranged from 5.25 to 20.04. There was significant variability within each subset of FAIRNeSS indicators (P value <0.001). Short-term goals had higher scores than medium- and long-term goals (P value <0.001). Collaboration composite scores correlated with the number of papers published (R2 = 0.400, P = 0.007) but not with the number of years active (R2 = 0.072, P = 0.3). Finally, the overall agreement between reviewers was 53.5%, and the overall correlation was 38.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Global neurosurgery has no established metrics for evaluating collaborations; therefore, we adapted the FAIRNeSS criteria to do so. The criteria may not be well suited for measuring the success and sustainability of global neurosurgery collaborations, creating a need to develop a more applicable alternate set of metrics.

Telemedicine in Surgical Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Access to timely and quality surgical care is limited in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Telemedicine, defined as the remote provision of health care using information, communication and telecommunication platforms have the potential to address some of the barriers to surgical care. However, synthesis of evidence on telemedicine use in surgical care in LMICs is lacking.

AIM

To describe the current state of evidence on the use and distribution of telemedicine for surgical care in LMICs.

METHODS

This was a scoping review of published and relevant grey literature on telemedicine use for surgical care in LMICs, following the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews guideline. PubMed-Medline, Web of Science, Scopus and African Journals Online databases were searched using a comprehensive search strategy from 1 January 2010 to 28 February 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 178 articles from 53 (38.7%) LMICs across 11 surgical specialties were included. The number of published articles increased from 2 in 2010 to 44 in 2020. The highest number of studies was from the World Health Organization Western Pacific region (n = 73; 41.0%) and of these, most were from China (n = 69; 94.5%). The most common telemedicine platforms used were telephone call (n = 71, 39.9%), video chat (n = 42, 23.6%) and WhatsApp/WeChat (n = 31, 17.4%). Telemedicine was mostly used for post-operative follow-up (n = 71, 39.9%), patient education (n = 32, 18.0%), provider training (n = 28, 15.7%) and provider-provider consultation (n = 16, 9.0%). Less than a third (n = 51, 29.1%) of the studies used a randomised controlled trial design, and only 23 (12.9%) reported effects on clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Telemedicine use for surgical care is emerging in LMICs, especially for post-operative visits. Basic platforms such as telephone calls and 2-way texting were successfully used for post-operative follow-up and education. In addition, file sharing and video chatting options were added when a physical assessment was required. Telephone calls and 2-way texting platforms should be leveraged to reduce loss to follow-up of surgical patients in LMICs and their use for pre-operative visits should be further explored. Despite these telemedicine potentials, there remains an uneven adoption across several LMICs. Also, up to two-thirds of the studies were of low-to-moderate quality with only a few focusing on clinical effectiveness. There is a need to further adopt, develop, and validate telemedicine use for surgical care in LMICs, particularly its impact on clinical outcomes.

Patient Follow-up After Orthopaedic Outreach Trips - Do We Know Whether Patients are Improving?

Background

The burden of traumatic musculoskeletal injuries falls greatest on low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). To help address this burden, organizations host over 6,000 outreach trips annually, 20% of which are orthopaedic. Monitoring post-surgical outcomes is critical to ensuring care quality; however, the implementation of such monitoring is unknown. The purpose of this review is to identify published follow-up practices of short-term orthopaedic surgery outreach trips to LMICs.

Methods

We completed a systematic review of Pubmed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and ProQuest following PRISMA guidelines. Follow-up method, rate, duration, and types of outcomes measured along with barriers to follow-up were collected and reported.

Results

The initial search yielded 1,452 articles, 18 of which were eligible. The mean follow-up time was 5.4 months (range: 15 days-7 years). The mean follow-up rate was 65.8% (range: 22%-100%), the weighted rate was 57.5%. Fifteen studies reported follow-up at or after 3 months while eight studies reported follow-up at or after 9 months. Fifteen studies reported follow-up in person, three reported follow-up via phone call or SMS. Outcome reporting varied among mortality, complications, and patient-reported outcomes. The majority (75%) outlined barriers to follow-up, most commonly noting transportation and costs of follow-up to the patient.

Conclusions

There is minimal and heterogeneous public reporting of patient outcomes and follow-up after outreach trips to LMICs, limiting quality assessment and improvement. Future work should address the design and implementation of tools and guidelines to improve follow-up as well as outcome measurement to ensure provision of high-quality care.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00268-022-06630-w.

Considerations for resuming global surgery outreach programs during and after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has disrupted the delivery of safe surgical care worldwide. One specific aspect of global surgical care that has been severely limited is the ability for physicians and trainees to participate in global surgical outreach programs in low- and middle-income countries.

METHODS

A narrative review of the literature regarding global surgical outreach programs during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic was performed. Factors that must be considered in the reinstatement of global surgical outreach programs were identified, and suggestions to address them were provided based on the available literature and the experiences of the senior authors.

RESULTS

As global surgical outreach programs were canceled at the start of the pandemic, many academic surgeons turned to digital solutions to continue to engage with low- and middle-income country partners. With the advent of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines and improved access to testing and treatment worldwide, the recommencement of global surgical outreach programs may begin to be considered. Important considerations before initiation include vaccine and testing availability for visiting providers, local staff, and patients, local hospital capacity, staff and equipment shortages, and the characteristics of the patient population and visiting providers. Region- and country-specific factors, including local infection rates and concomitant health crises, must also be taken into account. Expansion of digital collaborative efforts may further deepen international connections and promote sustainable models of care.

CONCLUSION

With careful consideration, global surgical outreach programs may begin to be safely restarted in the near future. The current article evaluates individual factors that must be considered to safely restart global surgical outreach programs as the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic is better controlled.

Are we curing by cutting? A call for long-term follow up and outcomes research in global surgery interventions - perspective

Success in global surgery interventions cannot be claimed until consistent long-term follow up is achieved and corresponding outcomes are studied. However, post-operative outcomes remain inconsistently collected and analyzed in the setting of global surgery, with current efforts largely focused on the delivery of surgical care. Barriers in low- and middle-income countries include patient cost and distance, low surgical workforce capacity, poor patient health literacy, lack of affordable technology availability, inconsistent documentation, and structural deficiencies. Here, we suggest that future work can be focused on (1) enhancing systems to facilitate long-term follow up and care, (2) expanding availability and adoption of electronic medical record systems, and (3) collaboration with local surgeons in the development of international cross-organizational registries and standardized quality measures. Long-term collaborations between local healthcare administrators and providers, policymakers, international bodies, nonprofit organizations, patients, and the private sector are necessary to build and sustain processes to achieve reliable long-term follow up and rigorous data collection, with the goal of ultimately ensuring better patient outcomes.

Developing a Sustainable Program for Volunteer Surgical Care in Low-Income and Middle-Income Countries

Volunteer medical missions to low-income and middle-income countries have been a popular but unregulated method of providing care to underserved regions of the world as they work to improve surgical capacity. This article addresses various organizational tenets, such as forming a mission statement, selecting a site location, determining funding sources, establishing a team, patient safety, organization, and postoperative care and follow-up.