The governance of overseas surgical collaborations - BFIRST/BSSH

Capacity Building During Short-Term Surgical Outreach Trips: A Review of What Guidelines Exist

INTRODUCTION

While short-term surgical outreach trips improve access to care in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), there is rising concern about their long-term impact. In response, many organizations seek to incorporate capacity building programs into their outreach efforts to help strengthen local health systems. Although leading organizations, like the World Health Organization (WHO), advocate for this approach, uniform guidelines are absent.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review, using search terms pertaining to capacity building guidelines during short-term surgical outreach trips. We extracted information on authorship, guideline development methodology, and guidelines relating to capacity building. Guidelines were classified according to the Global-QUEST framework, which outlines seven domains of capacity building on surgical outreach trips. Guideline development methodology frequencies and domain classifications frequencies were calculated; subsequently, guidelines were aggregated to develop a core guideline for each domain.

RESULTS

A total of 35 studies were included. Over 200 individual guidelines were extracted, spanning all seven framework domains. Guidelines were most frequently classified into Coordination and Community Impact domains and least frequently into the Finance domain. Less than half (46%) of studies collaborated with local communities to design the guidelines. Instead, guidelines were predominantly developed through author trip experience.

CONCLUSION

As short-term surgical trips increase, further work is needed to standardize guidelines, create actionable steps, and promote collaborations in order to promote accountability during short-term surgical outreach trips.

Outcomes of microsurgical free tissue transfer performed on international surgical collaborations in low-income and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Microsurgical free tissue transfer is the gold standard for reconstruction of significant soft tissue and bony defects following cancer resection and trauma. Many reconstructive units in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) do not yet have access to the resources or training required to perform microsurgical procedures. Long-term international collaborations have been formed with annual reconstructive programmes conducting microsurgery.

AIMS

To critically analyze outcomes of microsurgical free tissue transfer performed on international reconstructive collaborations in LMICs.

METHODS

PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes for free tissue transfer performed during international collaborations in LMICs using an inverse variance model. The study protocol was published prospectively and registered with PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021225613).

RESULTS

Seven studies, included 290 flaps on 284 patients. The most common sites requiring reconstruction were Head and neck (53% (n = 153)) and lower limb (7.9% (n = 23)) were lower limb reconstruction. The most common free flaps were radial forearm (22%; n = 64) and anterolateral thigh (18%; n = 51). Total Flap Failure rate was 3.8% (n = 13; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.9-6.3%) Overall complication rate was 38% (95% CI =27-48%), with 19% of flaps requiring emergency return to theatre (95% CI =14-26%). Flap salvage was successful in 52% of take-backs (95% CI =15% - 88%).

CONCLUSIONS

Free flaps performed during international surgical collaborations in LMICs have comparable failure rates to those performed in higher-income settings. However, there are higher complication and take-back rates. This should be taken into account when planning international collaborations. These results should help preoperative counselling and the consent process.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on international reconstructive collaborations in Africa

Background

The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has catalysed a widespread humanitarian crisis in many low- and middle-income countries around the world, with many African nations significantly impacted. The aim of this study was to quantify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the planning and provision of international reconstructive collaborations in Africa.

Methods

An anonymous, 14-question, multiple choice questionnaire was sent to 27 non-governmental organisations who regularly perform reconstructive surgery in Africa. The survey was open to responses for four weeks, closing on the 7^th of March 2021. A single reminder was sent out at 2 weeks. The survey covered four key domains: (1) NGO demographics; (2) the impact of COVID-19 on patient follow-up; (3) barriers to the safe provision of international surgical collaborations during COVID-19; (4) the impact of COVID-19 on NGO funding.

Results

A total of ten reconstructive NGOs completed the survey (response rate, 37%). Ethiopia (n = 5) and Tanzania (n = 4) were the countries where most collaborations took place. Plastic, reconstructive and burns surgery was the most common sub-speciality (n = 7). For NGOs that did not have a year-round presence in country (n = 8), only one NGO was able to perform reconstructive surgery in Africa during the pandemic. The most common barrier identified was travel restrictions (within country, n = 8 or country entry-exit, n = 7). Pre-pandemic, 1547 to ≥ 1800 patients received reconstructive surgery on international surgical collaborations. After the outbreak, 70% of NGOs surveyed had treated no patients, with approximately 1405 to ≥ 1640 patients left untreated over the last year.

Conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed huge pressures on health services and their delivery across the globe. This theme has extended into international surgical collaborations leading to increased unmet surgical needs in low- and middle-income countries.

Level of evidence: Not gradable.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00238-021-01892-4.

Protocol for a systematic review of outcomes from microsurgical free-tissue transfer performed on short-term collaborative surgical trips in low-income and middle-income countries

BACKGROUND

In many units around the world, microsurgical free-tissue transfer represents the gold standard for reconstruction of significant soft tissue defects following cancer, trauma or infection. However, many reconstructive units in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) do not yet have access to the resources, infrastructure or training required to perform any microsurgical procedures. Long-term international collaborations have been formed with annual short-term reconstructive missions conducting microsurgery. In the first instance, these provide reconstructive surgery to those who need it. In the longer-term, they offer an opportunity for teaching and the development of sustainable local services.

METHODS

A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis will be performed. A comprehensive, predetermined search strategy will be applied to the MEDLINE and Embase electronic databases from inception to August 2021. All clinical studies presenting sufficient data on free-tissue transfer performed on short-term collaborative surgical trips (STCSTs) in LMICs will be eligible for inclusion. The primary outcomes are rate of free flap failure, rate of emergency return to theatre for free flap salvage and successful salvage rate. The secondary outcomes include postoperative complications, cost effectiveness, impact on training, burden of disease, legacy and any functional or patient reported outcome measures. Screening of studies, data extraction and assessments of study quality and bias will be conducted by two authors. Individual study quality will be assessed according to the Oxford Evidence-based Medicine Scales of Evidence 2, and risk of bias using either the 'Revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials' (Rob2), the 'Risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions' (ROBINS-I) tool, or the National Institute for Health Quality Assessment tool for Case Series. Overall strength of evidence will be assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

DISCUSSION

To-date the outcomes of microsurgical procedures performed on STCSTs to LMICs are largely unknown. Improved education, funding and allocation of resources are needed to support surgeons in LMICs to perform free-tissue transfer. STCSTs provide a vehicle for sustainable collaboration and training. Disseminating microsurgical skills could improve the care received by patients living with reconstructive pathology in LMICs, but this is poorly established. This study sets out a robust protocol for a systematic review designed to critically analyse outcomes.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 225613.