Indicators for the evaluation of musculoskeletal trauma systems: A scoping review and Delphi study

BACKGROUND

Trauma is a leading cause of mortality and morbidity, disproportionately affecting low- and middle-income countries. Musculoskeletal trauma results in the majority of post-traumatic morbidity and disability globally. The literature has reported many performance indicators relating to trauma care, but few specific to musculoskeletal injuries.

STUDY OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to establish a practical list of performance indicators to evaluate and monitor the quality and equity of musculoskeletal trauma care delivery in health systems worldwide.

METHODS

A scoping review was performed that identified performance indicators related to musculoskeletal trauma care. Indicators were organized by phase of care (general, prevention, pre-hospital, hospital, post-hospital) within a modified Donabedian model (structure, process, outcome, equity). A panel of 21 experts representing 45 countries was assembled to identify priority indicators utilizing a modified Delphi approach.

RESULTS

The scoping review identified 1,206 articles and 114 underwent full text review. We included 95 articles which reported 498 unique performance indicators. Most indicators related to the hospital phase of care (n = 303, 60%) and structural characteristics (n = 221, 44%). Mortality (n = 50 articles) and presence of trauma registries (n = 16 articles) were the most frequently reported indicators. After 3 rounds of surveys our panel reached consensus on a parsimonious list of priority performance indicators. These focused on access to trauma care; processes and key resources for polytrauma triage, patient stabilization, and hemorrhage control; reduction and immobilization of fractures and dislocations; and management of compartment syndrome and open fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature has reported many performance indicators relating to trauma care, but few specific to musculoskeletal injuries. To create quality and equitable trauma systems, musculoskeletal care must be incorporated into development plans with continuous monitoring and improvement. The performance indicators identified by our expert panel and organized in a modified Donabedian model can serve as a method for evaluating musculoskeletal trauma care.

Operative Trauma Courses: A Scoping Review to Inform the Development of a Trauma Surgery Course for Low-Resource Settings

BACKGROUND

A multitude of operative trauma courses exist, most of which are designed for and conducted in high-resource settings. There are numerous barriers to adapting such courses to low- and low-middle-income countries (LMICs), including resource constraints and contextual variations in trauma care. Approaches to implementing operative trauma courses in LMICs have not been evaluated in a structured manner.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of the literature including databases (e.g., PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE), grey literature repositories, and structured queries of publicly available course materials to identify records that described operative trauma courses offered since 2000.

RESULTS

The search identified 3,518 non-duplicative records, of which 48 relevant reports were included in analysis. These reports represented 23 named and 11 unnamed operative trauma courses offered in 12 countries. Variability existed in course format and resource requirements, ranging from USD 40 to 3,000 per participant. Courses incorporated didactic and laboratory components, which utilized simulations, cadavers, or live animals. Course content overlapped significantly but was not standardized. Data were lacking on course implementation and promulgation, credentialing of instructors, and standardized evaluation metrics.

CONCLUSIONS

While many operative trauma courses have been described, most are not directly relatable to LMICs. Barriers include cost-prohibitive fees, lack of resources, limited data collection, and contextual variability that renders certain surgical care inappropriate in LMICs. Gaps exist in standardization of course content as well as transparency of credentialing and course implementation strategies. These issues can be addressed through developing an open-access operative trauma course for low-resource settings.

The Development and Inclusion of Questions on Surgery in the 2018 Zambia Demographic and Health Survey

Data from household surveys serve as the backbone to sustainable development planning. For the first time, questions on surgery have been included in a nationwide Demographic and Health Survey, showing that it is feasible to integrate these questions into a large-scale survey.

Background:

While primary data on the unmet need for surgery in low- and middle-income countries is lacking, household surveys could provide an entry point to collect such data. We describe the first development and inclusion of questions on surgery in a nationally representative Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) in Zambia.

Method:

Questions regarding surgical conditions were developed through an iterative consultative process and integrated into the rollout of the DHS survey in Zambia in 2018 and administered to a nationwide sample survey of eligible women aged 15–49 years and men aged 15–59 years.

Results:

In total, 7 questions covering 4 themes of service delivery, diagnosed burden of surgical disease, access to care, and quality of care were added. The questions were administered across 12,831 households (13,683 women aged 15–49 years and 12,132 men aged 15–59 years). Results showed that approximately 5% of women and 2% of men had undergone an operation in the past 5 years. Among women, cesarean delivery was the most common surgery; circumcision was the most common procedure among men. In the past 5 years, an estimated 0.61% of the population had been told by a health care worker that they might need surgery, and of this group, 35% had undergone the relevant procedure.

Conclusion:

For the first time, questions on surgery have been included in a nationwide DHS. We have shown that it is feasible to integrate these questions into a large-scale survey to provide insight into surgical needs at a national level. Based on the DHS design and implementation mechanisms, a country interested in including a set of questions like the one included in Zambia, could replicate this data collection in other settings, which provides an opportunity for systematic collection of comparable surgical data, a vital role in surgical health care system strengthening.

Top 10 Resources in Global Surgery

This resource list could serve to orient those interested in global surgery and could be supplemented with resources advocating for global surgery from clinical, population health, or policy perspectives.

Emergency and essential surgical healthcare services during COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries: A perspective

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in significant changes in health care systems worldwide, with low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) sustaining important repercussions. Specifically, alongside cancellation and postponements of non-essential surgical services, emergency and essential surgical care delivery may become affected due to the shift of human and material resources towards fighting the pandemic. For surgeries that do get carried through, new difficulties arise in protecting surgical personnel from contracting SARS-CoV-2. This scarcity in LMIC surgical ecosystems may result in higher morbidity and mortality, in addition to the COVID-19 toll. This paper aims to explore the potential consequences of COVID-19 on the emergency and essential surgical care in LMICs, to offer recommendations to mitigate damages and to reflect on preparedness for future crises. Reducing the devastating consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on LMIC emergency and essential surgical services can be achieved through empowering communities with accurate information and knowledge on prevention, optimizing surgical material resources, providing quality training of health care personnel to treat SARS-CoV-2, and ensuring adequate personal protection equipment for workers on the frontline. While LMIC health systems are under larger strain, the experience from previous outbreaks may aid in order to innovate and adapt to the current pandemic. Protecting LMIC surgical ecosystems will be a pivotal process in ensuring that previous health system strengthening efforts are preserved, comprehensive care for populations worldwide are ensured, and to allow for future developments beyond the pandemic.

Globalization of national surgical, obstetric and anesthesia plans: the critical link between health policy and action in global surgery

Efforts from the developed world to improve surgical, anesthesia and obstetric care in low- and middle-income countries have evolved from a primarily volunteer mission trip model to a sustainable health system strengthening approach as private and public stakeholders recognize the enormous health toll and financial burden of surgical disease. The National Surgical, Obstetric and Anesthesia Plan (NSOAP) has been developed as a policy strategy for countries to address, in part, the health burden of diseases amenable to surgical care, but these plans have not developed in isolation. The NSOAP has become a phenomenon of globalization as a broad range of partners - individuals and institutions - help in both NSOAP formulation, implementation and financing. As the nexus between policy and action in the field of global surgery, the NSOAP reflects a special commitment by state actors to make progress on global goals such as Universal Health Coverage and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. This requires a continued global commitment involving genuine partnerships that embrace the collective strengths of both national and global actors to deliver sustained, safe and affordable high-quality surgical care for all poor, rural and marginalized people.

Global surgery and the sustainable development goals

Background

The field of global surgery has gained significant recent momentum, catalysed by the 2015 publication of the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery, Disease Control Priorities 3 and World Health Assembly resolution 68.15. These reports characterized the global burden of disease amenable to surgical care, called for global investment in surgical systems, and recognized surgery and anaesthesia as essential components of universal health coverage.

Methods

A strategy proposed to strengthen surgical care is the development of national surgical, obstetric and anaesthesia plans (NSOAPs). This review examined how NSOAPs could contribute to the achievement of sustainable development goals (SDGs) 1, 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 16 and 17 by 2030, focusing on their potential impact on the healthcare systems in Ethiopia, Tanzania and Zambia.

Results

Due to the cross-cutting nature of surgery, obstetrics and anaesthesia, investing in these services will escalate progress to achieve gender equality, economic growth and infrastructure development. Universal health coverage will not be achieved without addressing the financial ramifications to the poor of seeking and receiving surgical care. NSOAPs provide a strategic framework and a data collection platform for evidence-based policy-making, accountability and implementation guidance.

Conclusion

The development and implementation of data-driven NSOAPs should be recognized as a powerful road map to accelerate achievement of the SDGs by 2030.

Development of a Unifying Target and Consensus Indicators for Global Surgical Systems Strengthening: Proposed by the Global Alliance for Surgery, Obstetric, Trauma, and Anaesthesia Care (The G4 Alliance)

After decades on the margins of primary health care, surgical and anaesthesia care is gaining increasing priority within the global development arena. The 2015 publications of the Disease Control Priorities third edition on Essential Surgery and the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery created a compelling evidenced-based argument for the fundamental role of surgery and anaesthesia within cost-effective health systems strengthening global strategy. The launch of the Global Alliance for Surgical, Obstetric, Trauma, and Anaesthesia Care in 2015 has further coordinated efforts to build priority for surgical care and anaesthesia. These combined efforts culminated in the approval of a World Health Assembly resolution recognizing the role of surgical care and anaesthesia as part of universal health coverage. Momentum gained from these milestones highlights the need to identify consensus goals, targets and indicators to guide policy implementation and track progress at the national level. Through an open consultative process that incorporated input from stakeholders from around the globe, a global target calling for safe surgical and anaesthesia care for 80% of the world by 2030 was proposed. In order to achieve this target, we also propose 15 consensus indicators that build on existing surgical systems metrics and expand the ability to prioritize surgical systems strengthening around the world.

Mapping Disparities in Access to Safe, Timely, and Essential Surgical Care in Zambia

Importance

Surgical care is widely unavailable in developing countries; advocates recommend that countries evaluate and report on access to surgical care to improve availability and aid health planners in decision making.

Objective

To analyze the infrastructure, capacity, and availability of surgical care in Zambia to inform health policy priorities.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this observational study, all hospitals providing surgical care were identified in cooperation with the Zambian Ministry of Health. On-site data collection was conducted from February 1 through August 30, 2011, with an adapted World Health Organization Global Initiative for Emergency and Essential Surgical Care survey. Data collection at each facility included interviews with hospital personnel and assessment of material resources. Data were geocoded and analyzed in a data visualization platform from March 1 to December 1, 2015. We analyzed time and distance to surgical services, as well as the proportion of the population living within 2 hours from a facility providing surgical care.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Surgical capacity, supplies, human resources, and infrastructure at each surgical facility, as well as the population living within 2 hours from a hospital providing surgical care.

Results

Data were collected from all 103 surgical facilities identified as providing surgical care. When including all surgical facilities (regardless of human resources and supplies), 14.9% of the population (2 166 460 of 14 500 000 people) lived more than 2 hours from surgical care. However, only 17 hospitals (16.5%) met the World Health Organization minimum standards of surgical safety; when limiting the analysis to these hospitals, 65.9% of the population (9 552 780 people) lived in an area that was more than 2 hours from a surgical facility. Geographic analysis of emergency and essential surgical care, defined as access to trauma care, obstetric care, and care of common abdominal emergencies, found that 80.7% of the population (11 704 700 people) lived in an area that was more than 2 hours from these surgical facilities.

Conclusions and Relevance

A large proportion of the population in Zambia does not have access to safe and timely surgical care; this percentage would change substantially if all surgical hospitals were adequately resourced. Geospatial visualization tools assist in the evaluation of surgical infrastructure in Zambia and can identify key areas for improvement.