Hospital proximity does not guarantee access to emergency care

Health system assessment for access to care after injury in low- or middle-income countries: A mixed methods study from Northern Malawi

BACKGROUND

Injuries represent a vast and relatively neglected burden of disease affecting low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While many health systems underperform in treating injured patients, most assessments have not considered the whole system. We integrated findings from 9 methods using a 3 delays approach (delays in seeking, reaching, or receiving care) to prioritise important trauma care health system barriers in Karonga, Northern Malawi, and exemplify a holistic health system assessment approach applicable in comparable settings.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

To provide multiple perspectives on each conceptual delay and include data from community-based and facility-based sources, we used 9 methods to examine the injury care health system. The methods were (1) household survey; (2) verbal autopsy analysis; (3) community focus group discussions (FGDs); (4) community photovoice; (5) facility care-pathway process mapping and elucidation of barriers following injury; (6) facility healthcare worker survey; (7) facility assessment survey; (8) clinical vignettes for care process quality assessment of facility-based healthcare workers; and (9) geographic information system (GIS) analysis. Empirical data collection took place in Karonga, Northern Malawi, between July 2019 and February 2020. We used a convergent parallel study design concurrently conducting all data collection before subsequently integrating results for interpretation. For each delay, a matrix was created to juxtapose method-specific data relevant to each barrier identified as driving delays to injury care. Using a consensus approach, we graded the evidence from each method as to whether an identified barrier was important within the health system. We identified 26 barriers to access timely quality injury care evidenced by at least 3 of the 9 study methods. There were 10 barriers at delay 1, 6 at delay 2, and 10 at delay 3. We found that the barriers "cost," "transport," and "physical resources" had the most methods providing strong evidence they were important health system barriers within delays 1 (seeking care), 2 (reaching care), and 3 (receiving care), respectively. Facility process mapping provided evidence for the greatest number of barriers-25 of 26 within the integrated analysis. There were some barriers with notable divergent findings between the community- and facility-based methods, as well as among different community- and facility-based methods, which are discussed. The main limitation of our study is that the framework for grading evidence strength for important health system barriers across the 9 studies was done by author-derived consensus; other researchers might have created a different framework.

CONCLUSIONS

By integrating 9 different methods, including qualitative, quantitative, community-, patient-, and healthcare worker-derived data sources, we gained a rich insight into the functioning of this health system's ability to provide injury care. This approach allowed more holistic appraisal of this health system's issues by establishing convergence of evidence across the diverse methods used that the barriers of cost, transport, and physical resources were the most important health system barriers driving delays to seeking, reaching, and receiving injury care, respectively. This offers direction and confidence, over and above that derived from single methodology studies, for prioritising barriers to address through health service development and policy.

Defining measures of emergency care access in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Over 50% of annual deaths in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) could be averted through access to high-quality emergency care.

OBJECTIVES

We performed a scoping review of the literature that described at least one measure of emergency care access in LMICs in order to understand relevant barriers to emergency care systems.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

English language studies published between 1 January 1990 and 30 December 2020, with one or more discrete measure(s) of access to emergency health services in LMICs described.

SOURCE OF EVIDENCE

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and the grey literature.

CHARTING METHODS

A structured data extraction tool was used to identify and classify the number of 'unique' measures, and the number of times each unique measure was studied in the literature ('total' measures). Measures of access were categorised by access type, defined by Thomas and Penchansky, with further categorisation according to the 'Three Delay' model of seeking, reaching and receiving care, and the WHO's Emergency Care Systems Framework (ECSF).

RESULTS

A total of 3103 articles were screened. 75 met full study inclusion. Articles were uniformly descriptive (n=75, 100%). 137 discrete measures of access were reported. Unique measures of accommodation (n=42, 30.7%) and availability (n=40, 29.2%) were most common. Measures of seeking, reaching and receiving care were 22 (16.0%), 46 (33.6%) and 69 (50.4%), respectively. According to the ECSF slightly more measures focused on prehospital care-inclusive of care at the scene and through transport to a facility (n=76, 55.4%) as compared with facility-based care (n=57, 41.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Numerous measures of emergency care access are described in the literature, but many measures are overaddressed. Development of a core set of access measures with associated minimum standards are necessary to aid in ensuring universal access to high-quality emergency care in all settings.

A descriptive analysis of the casemix presenting to a tertiary hospital emergency centre in East London, South Africa

•

Quality emergency health care is not a reality in many low- and middle-income countries.

•

Emergency Centre casemix description is essential for effective service delivery planning and resource allocation.

•

A high trauma burden is described, which is in keeping with South Africa's quadruple burden of disease.

•

This descriptive study provides essential data that could guide further development of emergency care systems within the Eastern Cape.

Introduction

Emergency centres are most often the point of entry to the healthcare system for patients presenting with emergencies. Even though emergency medicine has developed rapidly in certain regions of South Africa, it is yet to flourish in the Eastern Cape. A paucity of data exists with regards to the demographic and disease profile of patients presenting to Eastern Cape emergency centres. This study describes the casemix presenting to a tertiary hospital emergency centre in East London in the Eastern Cape.

Methods

A retrospective descriptive study was conducted of all patients presenting to Frere Hospital emergency centre from 1st of August 2019 to 31^st of October 2019. Data were manually collected from the emergency centre paper-based register for the study period and included: patient demographics, geographical location, triage category, presenting complaint, disposition, and process times. Descriptive statistics were used to describe all variables.

Results

A total of 6 204 patients presented during the study period. The median age was 31 years, with a male predominance of 56%. Lower acuity triage categories (green and yellow) represented 67% of all cases. Trauma comprised 56% of all presentations, with assault being the most prevalent mechanism of injury in the adult population (n = 1 460, 48%). Sundays (18%) and Mondays (20%) had the highest patient caseload. The majority of patients were discharged home (n = 4 257, 69%) of which 79% had lower acuity triage categories. The majority of patients lived within a 20 km radius of Frere Hospital (n = 4 689, 77%).

Conclusion

This descriptive study provides essential data that could guide further development of emergency care systems within the Eastern Cape. A high trauma burden, comprising predominantly of lower acuity presentations are described. Social and economic determinants of violence must be addressed and multisectoral interventions are required to reduce the high burden of trauma.

Access to care following injury in Northern Malawi, a comparison of travel time estimates between Geographic Information System and community household reports

INTRODUCTION

Injuries disproportionately impact low- and middle-income countries like Malawi. The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery's indicators include the population proportion accessing laparotomy and open fracture care, key trauma interventions, within two hours. The "Golden Hour" for receiving facility-based resuscitation also guides injury care system strengthening. Firstly, we estimated the proportion of the local population able to reach primary, secondary and tertiary facility care within two and one hours using Geographic Information System (GIS) analysis. Secondly, we compared community household-reported with GIS-estimated travel time.

METHODS

Using information from a Health and Demographic Surveillance Site (Karonga, Malawi) on road network, facility location, and local staff-estimated travel speeds, we used a GIS-generated friction surface to calculate the shortest travel time from all households to each facility serving the population. We surveyed community households who reported travel time to their preferred, closest, government secondary and tertiary facilities. For recently injured community members, time to reach facility care was recorded. To assess the relationship between community household-reported travel time and GIS-estimated travel time, we used linear regression to generate a proportionality constant. To assess associations and agreement between injured patient-reported and GIS-estimated travel time, we used Kendall rank and Cohen's kappa tests.

RESULTS

Using GIS, we estimated 79.1% of households could reach any secondary facility, 20.5% the government secondary facility, and 0% the government tertiary facility, within two hours. Only 28.2% could reach any secondary facility within one hour, 0% for the government secondary facility. Community household-reported travel time exceeded GIS-estimated travel time. The proportionality constant was 1.25 (95%CI 1.21-1.30) for the closest facility, 1.28 (95%CI 1.23-1.34) for the preferred facility, 1.45 (95%CI 1.33-1.58) for the government secondary facility, and 2.12 (95%CI 1.84-2.41) for tertiary care. Comparing injured patient-reported with GIS-estimated travel time, the correlation coefficient was 0.25 (SE 0.047) and Cohen's kappa was 0.15 (95%CI 0.078-0.23), suggesting poor agreement.

DISCUSSION

Most households couldn't reach government secondary care within recognised thresholds indicating poor temporal access. Since GIS-estimated travel time was shorter than community-reported travel time, the true proportion may be lower still. GIS derived estimates of population emergency care access in similar contexts should be interpreted accordingly.

A Narrative Review of Kenya's Surgical Capacity Using the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery's Indicator Framework

Surgery, anesthesia, and obstetric (SAO) care is quickly being recognized for its critical role in cost-effectively improving global morbidity and mortality. Six core indicators for SAO capacity were established in 2015 by the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery (LCoGS) and include: SAO provider density, population proximity to surgery-ready facilities, annual national operative volume, a system to track perioperative mortality rate, and protection from impoverishing and catastrophic expenditures. The surgical capacity of Kenya, a lower-middle-income country, has not been evaluated using this framework. Our goal was to review published literature on surgery in Kenya to assess the country's surgical capacity and system strength. A narrative review of the relevant literature provided estimates for each LCoGS indicator. While progress has been made in expanding access to care across the country, key steps remain in the effort to provide equitable, affordable, and timely care to Kenya's population through universal health coverage. Additional investment into training SAO providers, operative infrastructure, and accessibility are recommended through a national surgery, obstetric, and anesthesia plan.

Assessing trauma care systems in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and evidence synthesis mapping the Three Delays framework to injury health system assessments

BACKGROUND

The large burden of injuries falls disproportionately on low/middle-income countries (LMICs). Health system interventions improve outcomes in high-income countries. Assessing LMIC trauma systems supports their improvement. Evaluating systems using a Three Delays framework, considering barriers to seeking (Delay 1), reaching (Delay 2) and receiving care (Delay 3), has aided maternal health gains. Rapid assessments allow timely appraisal within resource and logistically constrained settings. We systematically reviewed existing literature on the assessment of LMIC trauma systems, applying the Three Delays framework and rapid assessment principles.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and narrative synthesis of articles assessing LMIC trauma systems. We searched seven databases and grey literature for studies and reports published until October 2018. Inclusion criteria were an injury care focus and assessment of at least one defined system aspect. We mapped each study to the Three Delays framework and judged its suitability for rapid assessment.

RESULTS

Of 14 677 articles identified, 111 studies and 8 documents were included. Sub-Saharan Africa was the most commonly included region (44.1%). Delay 3, either alone or in combination, was most commonly assessed (79.3%) followed by Delay 2 (46.8%) and Delay 1 (10.8%). Facility assessment was the most common method of assessment (36.0%). Only 2.7% of studies assessed all Three Delays. We judged 62.6% of study methodologies potentially suitable for rapid assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Whole health system injury research is needed as facility capacity assessments dominate. Future studies should consider novel or combined methods to study Delays 1 and 2, alongside care processes and outcomes.

Considerations for service delivery for emergency care in low resource settings

In a shift from the more traditional disease focused model of global health interventions, increasing attention is now being placed on the importance of strengthening healthcare systems as a key component for achieving improved health outcomes. As emergency care systems continue to develop and strengthen around the world, the concept of service delivery provides one way to assess how well these systems are functioning. By focusing on service delivery, a system can be evaluated based on its ability to provide patients with access to the high-quality emergency care that they deserve. While the concept of service delivery is commonly used to evaluate the effectiveness of care in high-resource settings, its use in low resource settings has previously been limited due to challenges in operationalizing the concept in a context appropriate way. This article will begin by discussing the concept of service delivery as it specifically applies to emergency care systems and then discuss some of the challenges in defining and assessing this concept in low resource settings. The article will then discuss several new tools that have been developed to specifically address ways to evaluate emergency care service delivery in low-resource settings that can be used to inform future systems strengthening activities.

Governing access to emergency care in Africa

Emergency care not only has the potential to address a large portion of death and disability in low- and middle-income countries, it is also essential to achieving the current Universal Health Coverage agenda and fulfilling the universal human right to the highest attainable standard of health. One of six health system building blocks, governance is often neglected but nonetheless essential for guaranteeing access and strengthening emergency care systems in Africa. In this paper, we highlight key components of governance that are necessary to guaranteeing access to emergency care, describe current examples of emergency care accessibility laws and regulation in various African countries, and suggest priorities for measuring and evaluating the impact of legal guarantees for access to emergency care in Africa.

Emergency care status, priorities and standards for the Pacific region: A multiphase survey and consensus process across 17 different Pacific Island Countries and Territories

Background

Effective emergency care (EC) reduces mortality, aids disaster and outbreak response, and is necessary for universal health coverage. Surge events frequently challenge Pacific Island Countries and Territories (PICTs), where robust routine EC is required for resilient health systems. We aimed to describe the current status, determine priority actions and set minimum standards for EC systems development across the Pacific region.

Methods

We used a prospective, multiphase, expert consensus process to collect data from PICT EC stakeholders using focus groups, electronic surveys and panel review between August 2018 and April 2019. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, consensus agreement and graphic interpretation. We structured the research according to the World Health Organisation EC Systems and building block framework adapted for the Pacific context.

Findings

Over 200 participants from 17 PICTs engaged in at least one component of the multiphase process. Gaps in functional capacity exist in most PICTs for both facility-based and pre-hospital care. EC is a low priority across the Pacific and integrated poorly with disaster plans. Participants emphasised human resource support and government recognition of EC as priority actions, and generated 24 facility-based and 22 pre-hospital Pacific EC standards across all building blocks.

Interpretation

PICT stakeholders now have baseline indicators and a comprehensive roadmap for EC development within a globally recognised health systems framework. This study generates practical, context-appropriate tools to trigger further research, conduct evidence-based advocacy, drive future improvements and measure progress towards achieving universal health access for Pacific peoples.

Funding

Secretariat of the Pacific Community (partial)

Delays in hospital admissions in patients with fractures across 18 low-income and middle-income countries (INORMUS): a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery established the Three Delays framework, categorising delays in accessing timely surgical care into delays in seeking care (First Delay), reaching care (Second Delay), and receiving care (Third Delay). Globally, knowledge gaps regarding delays for fracture care, and the lack of large prospective studies informed the rationale for our international observational study. We investigated delays in hospital admission as a surrogate for accessing timely fracture care and explored factors associated with delayed hospital admission.

METHODS

In this prospective observational substudy of the ongoing International Orthopaedic Multicenter Study in Fracture Care (INORMUS), we enrolled patients with fracture across 49 hospitals in 18 low-income and middle-income countries, categorised into the regions of China, Africa, India, south and east Asia, and Latin America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had been admitted to a hospital within 3 months of sustaining an orthopaedic trauma. We collected demographic injury data and time to hospital admission. Our primary outcome was the number of patients with open and closed fractures who were delayed in their admission to a treating hospital. Delays for patients with open fractures were defined as being more than 2 h from the time of injury (in accordance with the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery) and for those with closed fractures as being a delay of more than 24 h. Secondary outcomes were reasons for delay for all patients with either open or closed fractures who were delayed for more than 24 h. We did logistic regression analyses to identify risk factors of delays of more than 2 h in patients with open fractures and delays of more than 24 h in patients with closed fractures. Logistic regressions were adjusted for region, age, employment, urban living, health insurance, interfacility referral, method of transportation, number of fractures, mechanism of injury, and fracture location. We further calculated adjusted relative risk (RR) from adjusted odds ratios, adjusted for the same variables. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02150980, and is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between April 3, 2014, and May 10, 2019, we enrolled 31 255 patients with fractures, with a median age of 45 years (IQR 31-62), of whom 19 937 (63·8%) were men, and 14 524 (46·5%) had lower limb fractures, making them the most common fractures. Of 5256 patients with open fractures, 3778 (71·9%) were not admitted to hospital within 2 h. Of 25 999 patients with closed fractures, 7141 (27·5%) were delayed by more than 24 h. Of all regions, Latin America had the greatest proportions of patients with delays (173 [88·7%] of 195 patients with open fractures; 426 [44·7%] of 952 with closed fractures). Among patients delayed by more than 24 h, the most common reason for delays were interfacility referrals (3755 [47·7%] of 7875) and Third Delays (cumulatively interfacility referral and delay in emergency department: 3974 [50·5%]), while Second Delays (delays in reaching care) were the least common (423 [5·4%]). Compared with other methods of transportation (eg, walking, rickshaw), ambulances led to delay in transporting patients with open fractures to a treating hospital (adjusted RR 0·66, 99% CI 0·46-0·93). Compared with patients with closed lower limb fractures, patients with closed spine (adjusted RR 2·47, 99% CI 2·17-2·81) and pelvic (1·35, 1·10-1·66) fractures were most likely to have delays of more than 24 h before admission to hospital.

INTERPRETATION

In low-income and middle-income countries, timely hospital admission remains largely inaccessible, especially among patients with open fractures. Reducing hospital-based delays in receiving care, and, in particular, improving interfacility referral systems are the most substantial tools for reducing delays in admissions to hospital.

FUNDING

National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, McMaster Surgical Associates, and Hamilton Health Sciences.

Developing emergency care systems: a human rights-based approach

The delivery of emergency care is an effective strategy to reduce the global burden of disease. Emergency care cross cuts traditional disease-focused disciplines to manage a wide range of the acute illnesses and injuries that contribute substantially to death and disability, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. While the universal health coverage (UHC) movement is gaining support, and human rights and health systems are integral to UCH, few concrete discussions on the human right to emergency care have been taken place to date. Furthermore, no rights-based approach to developing emergency care systems has been proposed. In this article, we explore key components of the right to health (that is, availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality of health facilities, goods and services) as they relate to emergency care systems. We propose the use of a rights-based framework for the fulfilment of core obligations of the right to health and the progressive realization of emergency care in all countries.