"For this one, let me take the risk": why surgical staff continued to perform caesarean sections during the 2014-2016 Ebola epidemic in Sierra Leone

Health systems resilience in fragile and conflict-affected settings: a systematic scoping review

BACKGROUND

Health systems resilience (HSR) research is a rapidly expanding field, in which key concepts are discussed and theoretical frameworks are emerging with vibrant debate. Fragile and conflict-affected settings (FCAS) are contexts exposed to compounding stressors, for which resilience is an important characteristic. However, only limited evidence has been generated in such settings. We conducted a scoping review to: (a) identify the conceptual frameworks of HSR used in the analysis of shocks and stressors in FCAS; (b) describe the representation of different actors involved in health care governance and service provision in these settings; and (c) identify health systems operations as they relate to absorption, adaptation, and transformation in FCAS.

METHODS

We used standard, extensive search methods. The search captured studies published between 2006 and January 2022. We included all peer reviewed and grey literature that adopted a HSR lens in the analysis of health responses to crises. Thematic analysis using both inductive and deductive approaches was conducted, adopting frameworks related to resilience characteristics identified by Kruk et al., and the resilience capacities described by Blanchet et al. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies met our inclusion criteria. The governance-centred, capacity-oriented framework for HSR emerged as the most frequently used lens of analysis to describe the health responses to conflict and chronic violence specifically. Most studies focused on public health systems' resilience analysis, while the private health sector is only examined in complementarity with the former. Communities are minimally represented, despite their widely acknowledged role in supporting HSR. The documentation of operations enacting HSR in FCAS is focused on absorption and adaptation, while transformation is seldom described. Absorptive, adaptive, and transformative interventions are described across seven different domains: safety and security, society, health system governance, stocks and supplies, built environment, health care workforce, and health care services.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review findings suggest that the governance-centred framework can be useful to better understand HSR in FCAS. Future HSR research should document adaptive and transformative strategies that advance HSR, particularly in relation to actions intended to promote the safety and security of health systems, the built environment for health, and the adoption of a social justice lens.

Trends of surgical-care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multi-centre study in India (IndSurg Collaboration)

Context

The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdowns adversely affected global healthcare services to varying extents. To accommodate its added burden, emergency services were affected along-with elective surgeries.

Aims

To quantify and analyze the trends of essential surgeries and bellwether procedures during the waxing and waning of the pandemic, across various hospitals in India.

Settings and Design

Multi-centric retrospective study.

Methods and Material

A research consortium led by World Health Organization (WHO) Collaboration Center (WHOCC) for Research in Surgical Care Delivery in Low-and Middle-Income countries, India, conducted this study with 5 centers. All surgeries performed during April 2020 (Wave I), November 2020 (Recovery I), and April 2021 (Wave II) were compared with those performed in April 2019 (pre-pandemic period).

Statistical Analysis Used

Microsoft Excel 2019 and SPSS Version 20.

Results

The total number of surgeries reduced by 77% during Wave I, which improved to a 52% reduction in Recovery I compared to the pre-pandemic period. However, surgeries were reduced again during Wave II to 68%, but the reduction was less compared to Wave I. Emergency and essential surgeries were affected along with the elective ones but to a lesser extent.

Conclusions

The present study has quantified the effects of the pandemic on surgical-care delivery across a timeline and documented a reduction in overall surgical volumes during the peaks of the pandemic (Wave I and II) with minimal improvement as the surge of COVID-19 cases declined (Recovery II). The surgical volumes improved during the second wave compared to the first one which may be attributable to better preparedness. Cesarean sections were affected the least.

Influence on operative time of immediate skin-to-skin care in low-risk primary cesarean births for breech presentation: Retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Multiple benefits for both, mother and baby have been reported from immediate skin-to-skin care (SSC). The aim of this study was to analyze the influence of SSC on operative time and blood loss in primary cesarean births for breech presentation.

METHODS

A SSC protocol for cesarean birth was implemented in our institution on February 25, 2019. In this single-center retrospective cohort study, we compared the outcomes of planned primary cesarean births for breech presentation at term before and after its implementation.

RESULTS

Data from 110 women who had a cesarean birth for breech presentation at term were analyzed, 55 in each group. Group 1 were women who had immediate SSC and Group 2 were women without immediate SSC. Maternal and surgical characteristics, and neonatal outcomes were similar in both groups. The mean operative time was 3.22 minutes shorter in the immediate SSC group compared with the not immediate SSC group (37.13 ± 12.27 vs 40.35 ± 12.23 minutes; P = 0.171).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, immediate SSC following a low-risk cesarean birth for breech presentation neither prolongs the operative time nor increases blood loss during the procedure. Although we were unable to demonstrate a significant reduction in the operative time with the immediate SSC protocol, a decrease of 3 minutes was noted.

Healthcare Workers' Resilience Toolkit for Disaster Management and Climate Change Adaptation

Climate change has been recognised as a multiplier of risk factors affecting public health. Disruptions caused by natural disasters and other climate-driven impacts are placing increasing demands on healthcare systems. These, in turn, impact the wellness and performance of healthcare workers (HCWs) and hinder the accessibility, functionality and safety of healthcare systems. This study explored factors influencing HCWs' disaster management capabilities with the aim of improving their resilience and adaptive capacity in the face of climate change. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with thirteen HCWs who dealt with disasters within two hospitals in Queensland, Australia. Analysis of the results identified two significant themes, HCWs' disaster education and HCWs' wellness and needs. The latter comprised five subthemes: HCWs' fear and vulnerability, doubts and uncertainty, competing priorities, resilience and adaptation, and needs assessment. This study developed an 'HCWs Resilience Toolkit', which encourages mindfulness amongst leaders, managers and policymakers about supporting four priority HCWs' needs: 'Wellness', 'Education', 'Resources' and 'Communication'. The authors focused on the 'Education' component to detail recommended training for each of the pre-disaster, mid-disaster and post-disaster phases. The authors conclude the significance of the toolkit, which provides a timely contribution to the healthcare sector amidst ongoing adversity.

Investigating Organizational Learning and Adaptations for Improved Disaster Response Towards "Resilient Hospitals:" An Integrative Literature Review

Background:

For hospitals, learning from disaster response efforts and adapting organizational practices can improve resilience in dealing with future disruptions. However, amidst global disruptions by climate change, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and other disasters, hospitals’ ability to cope continues to be highly variable. Hence, there are increasing calls to improve hospitals’ capabilities to grow and adapt towards enhanced resilience.

Aim:

This study aims two-fold: (1) to characterize the current state of knowledge about how hospitals are gaining knowledge from their responses to disasters, and (2) to explore how this knowledge can be applied to inform organizational practices for hospital resilience.

Method:

This study used Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines for data collection and framework for data analysis, Covidence software, and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and keywords relevant to “hospitals,” “learn,” “disaster response,” and “resilience.” The quality appraisal used an adapted version of the Mixed Methods Assessment Tool (MMAT).

Results:

After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria and quality appraisal, out of the 420 articles retrieved, 22 articles remained for thematic and content analysis. The thematic analysis included the hospital’s functional (operational) and physical (structural and non-structural) sections. The content analysis followed nine learning areas (Governance and Leadership, Planning and Risk Assessment, Surveillance and Monitoring, Communication and Network Engagement, Staff Practices and Safety, Equipment and Resources, Facilities and Infrastructure, Novelty and Innovation, and Learning and Evaluation).

On applying the Deming cycle, only four studies described a completed learning cycle wherein hospitals adapted their organizational structures using the prior experience and evaluation gained in responding to disaster(s).

Conclusions:

There is a gap between hospitals’ organizational learning and institutionalized practice. The conceptualized Hybrid Resilience Learning Framework (HRLF) aims to guide the hospitals’ decision makers in evaluating organizational resilience and knowledge.

In the face of disasters, both the stressful factors and the coping strategies that affect the health care workers (HCWs) should be substantially considered.

'We are not going to shut down, because we cannot postpone pregnancy': a mixed-methods study of the provision of maternal healthcare in six referral maternity wards in four sub-Saharan African countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

Referral hospitals in sub-Saharan Africa are located in crowded urban areas, which were often epicentres of the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper prospectively assesses how maternal healthcare was provided in six referral hospitals in Guinea, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Mixed-methods design using three data sources: (1) qualitative data from repeated rounds of semi-structured interviews conducted between July 2020 and February 2021 with 22 maternity skilled heath personnel (SHP) on perceptions of care provision; (2) quantitative monthly routine data on caesarean section and labour induction from March 2019 to February 2021; and (3) timeline data of COVID-19 epidemiology, national and hospital-level events. Qualitative and quantitative data were analysed separately, framed based on timeline analysis, and triangulated during reporting.

RESULTS

We identified three periods: first wave, slow period and second wave. The first wave was challenging for SHP given little knowledge about COVID-19, lack of infection prevention and control training, and difficulties reaching workplace. Challenges that persisted beyond the first wave were shortage of personal protective equipment and no rapid testing for women suspected with COVID-19. We noted no change in the proportion of caesarean sections during the pandemic, and a small increase in the proportion of labour inductions. All hospitals arranged isolation areas for women suspected/confirmed with COVID-19 and three hospitals provided care to women with suspected/confirmed COVID-19. Breastfeeding was not discouraged and newborns were not separated from mothers confirmed with COVID-19. Care provision was maintained through dedication of SHP, support from hospital management and remote communication between SHP.

CONCLUSION

Routine maternal care provision was maintained in referral hospitals, despite first wave challenges. Referral hospitals and SHP contributed to guideline development for pregnant women suspected/confirmed with COVID-19. Maternity SHP, women and pregnancy must always be included in priority setting when responding to health system shocks, including outbreaks.

How clinicians manage routinely low supplies of personal protective equipment

BACKGROUND

Recommended personal protective equipment (PPE) is routinely limited or unavailable in low-income countries, but there is limited research as to how clinicians adapt to that scarcity, despite the implications for patients and workers.

METHODS

This is a qualitative secondary analysis of case study data collected in Liberia in 2019. Data from the parent study were included in this analysis if it addressed availability and use of PPE in the clinical setting. Conventional content analysis was used on data including: field notes documenting nurse practice, semi-structured interview transcripts, and photographs.

RESULTS

Data from the majority of participants (32/37) and all facilities (12/12) in the parent studies were included. Eighty-three percent of facilities reported limited PPE. Five management strategies for coping with limited PPE supplies were observed, reported, or both: rationing PPE, self-purchasing PPE, asking patients to purchase PPE, substituting PPE, and working without PPE. Approaches to rationing PPE included using PPE only for symptomatic patients or not performing physical exams. Substitutions for PPE were based on supply availability.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies developed by clinicians to manage low PPE likely have negative consequences for both workers and patients; further research into the topic is important, as is better PPE provision in low-income countries.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital utilisation in Sierra Leone

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected health systems in many countries, but little is known about effects on health systems in sub-Saharan Africa. This study examines the effects of COVID-19 on hospital utilisation in a sub-Saharan country, Sierra Leone.

METHODS

Mixed-methods study using longitudinal nationwide hospital data (admissions, operations, deliveries and referrals) and qualitative interviews with healthcare workers and patients. Hospital data were compared across quarters (Q) in 2020, with day 1 of Q2 representing the start of the pandemic in Sierra Leone. Admissions are reported in total and disaggregated by sex, service (surgical, medical, maternity and paediatric) and hospital type (government or private non-profit). Referrals in 2020 were compared with 2019 to assess whether any changes were the result of seasonality. Comparisons were performed using Student's t-test. Qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

From Q1 to Q2, weekly mean hospital admissions decreased by 14.7% (p=0.005). Larger decreases were seen in male 18.8% than female 12.5% admissions. The largest decreases were in surgical admissions, a 49.8% decrease (p<0.001) and medical admissions, a 28.7% decrease (p=0.002). Paediatric and maternity admissions did not significantly change. Total operations decreased by 13.9% (p<0.001), while caesarean sections and facility-based deliveries showed significant increases: 12.7% (p=0.014) and 7.5% (p=0.03), respectively. In Q3, total admissions remained 13.2% lower (p<0.001) than Q1. Mean weekly referrals were lower in Q2 and Q3 of 2020 compared with 2019, suggesting findings were unlikely to be seasonal. Qualitative analysis identified both supply-side factors, prioritisation of essential services, introduction of COVID-19 services and pausing elective care, and demand-side factors, fear of nosocomial infection and financial hardship.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrated a decrease in hospital utilisation during COVID-19, the decrease is less than reported in other countries during COVID-19 and less than reported during the Ebola epidemic.

Barriers to maternal health services during the Ebola outbreak in three West African countries: a literature review

Introduction

The Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak in West Africa, affecting Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone from 2014 to 2016, was a substantial public health crisis with health impacts extending past EVD itself. Access to maternal health services (MHS) was disrupted during the epidemic, with reductions in antenatal care, facility-based deliveries and postnatal care. We aimed to identify and describe barriers related to the uptake and provision of MHS during the 2014–2016 EVD outbreak in West Africa.

Methods

In June 2020, we conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed publications and grey literature from relevant stakeholder organisations. Search terms were generated to identify literature that explained underlying access barriers to MHS. Published literature in scientific journals was first searched and extracted from PubMed and Web of Science databases for the period between 1 January 2014 and 27 June 2020. We hand-searched relevant stakeholder websites. A ‘snowball’ approach was used to identify relevant sources uncaptured in the systematic search. The identified literature was examined to synthesise themes using an existing framework.

Results

Nineteen papers were included, with 26 barriers to MHS uptake and provision identified. Three themes emerged: (1) fear and mistrust, (2) health system and service constraints, and (3) poor communication. Our analysis of the literature indicates that fear, experienced by both service users and providers, was the most recurring barrier to MHS. Constrained health systems negatively impacted MHS on the supply side. Poor communication and inadequately coordinated training efforts disallowed competent provision of MHS.

Conclusions

Barriers to accessing MHS during the EVD outbreak in West Africa were influenced by complex but inter-related factors at the individual, interpersonal, health system and international level. Future responses to EVD outbreaks need to address underlying reasons for fear and mistrust between patients and providers, and ensure MHS are adequately equipped both routinely and during crises.

Interventions to Improve the Willingness to Work Among Health care Professionals in Times of Disaster: A Scoping Review

The critical role of the health workforce in the function of the health care system is undeniable. In times of disaster and public health emergency, the importance of this valuable resource for the organization multiplies. This scoping review was conducted to identify, analyze, and categorize interventions to improve willingness to work in times of disaster as well as the existing knowledge gaps in the topic. For this purpose, four databases were searched. These included Scopus, PubMed, WOS, and World Health Organization observatory, and they were searched for papers published from July 2000 to September 2020. Studies of the English language that described strategies to improve human resources for health willingness to work during times of disaster/public health emergency were included. Full-text papers were screened by authors and data extraction was done according to self-designed form. Framework analysis identified key interventions based on human resources for health action framework. From 6246 search results, 52 articles were included, a great portion of which was published in 2020 probably due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Northern America was the region with most studies. From 52 included studies, 21 papers have reported the interventions to improve willingness to work and 31 papers have explored factors that affected a willingness to work. The interventions used in the studies were categorized into five themes as Leadership, Partnership, Financing, Education, and Organizational policies. The most and least interventions were financial and partnership respectively. The review identified a wide range of feasible strategies and interventions to improve human resources for health's willingness to work at times of disaster that are expected to be effective. Organizations should let the staff know these decisions and as a necessary step in every organizational intervention remember to evaluate the impacts.

Global guidance for surgical care during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Surgeons urgently need guidance on how to deliver surgical services safely and effectively during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim was to identify the key domains that should be considered when developing pandemic preparedness plans for surgical services.

METHODS

A scoping search was conducted to identify published articles relating to management of surgical patients during pandemics. Key informant interviews were conducted with surgeons and anaesthetists with direct experience of working during infectious disease outbreaks, in order to identify key challenges and solutions to delivering effective surgical services during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles were identified from the scoping search, and surgeons and anaesthetists representing 11 territories were interviewed. To mount an effective response to COVID-19, a pandemic response plan for surgical services should be developed in advance. Key domains that should be included are: provision of staff training (such as patient transfers, donning and doffing personal protection equipment, recognizing and managing COVID-19 infection); support for the overall hospital response to COVID-19 (reduction in non-urgent activities such as clinics, endoscopy, non-urgent elective surgery); establishment of a team-based approach for running emergency services; and recognition and management of COVID-19 infection in patients treated as an emergency and those who have had surgery. A backlog of procedures after the end of the COVID-19 pandemic is inevitable, and hospitals should plan how to address this effectively to ensure that patients having elective treatment have the best possible outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Hospitals should prepare detailed context-specific pandemic preparedness plans addressing the identified domains. Specific guidance should be updated continuously to reflect emerging evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Personal Protective Equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic and operative time in cesarean section: retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The covid-19 pandemic has meant a change in working protocols, as well as in Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). Obstetricians have had to adapt quickly to these changes without knowing how they affected their clinical practice. The aim of the present study was to evaluate how COVID-19 pandemic and PPE can affect operative time, operating room time, transfer into the operating room to delivery time and skin incision to delivery time in cesarean section.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective cohort study. Women with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection having a cesarean section after March 7th, 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic were included in the study. For each woman with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, a woman who had a cesarean section for the same indication during the COVID-19 pandemic and with similar clinical history but not affected by SARS-CoV-2 was included.

RESULTS

42 cesarean sections were studied. The operating room time was longer in the COVID-19 confirmed or suspected women: 90 (73.0 to 110.0) versus 61 (48.0 to 70.5) minutes; p < .001. The transfer into the operating room to delivery time was longer, but not statistically significant, in urgent cesarean sections in COVID-19 confirmed or suspected women: 25.5 (17.5 to 31.75) versus 18.0 (10.0 to 26.25) minutes; p = .113.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in the operative time, transfer into the operating room to delivery time and skin incision to delivery time when wearing PPE in cesarean section. The COVID-19 pandemic and the use of PPE resulted in a significant increase in operating room time.