Diagnostic Accuracy of Bethesda Classification of Thyroid Nodules at a Kenyan Hospital: A Retrospective Study

Background: The Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology (TBSRTC) was developed to standardize the reporting of thyroid nodule fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) results. The adoption of TBSRTC is based on the implied risk of malignancy per category, but this has shown wide variation in different regions worldwide. Aim: The aim of this study is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Bethesda classification of thyroid nodules in a Kenyan hospital. Methods: A retrospective longitudinal study examined FNAC and histopathology data of thyroid gland nodules at a Kenyan hospital from 2010 to 2019; specimens from 347 patients were found. An analysis was performed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Bethesda classification in detecting malignancy among these patients. Results: The malignancy rate was 16.1%. The risk of malignancy as per the Bethesda category was as follows: non-diagnostic—19.6%, benign—6%, atypia of undetermined significance—20%, follicular neoplasm—16.7%, suspicious for malignancy—80%, and malignant—85.7%. The diagnostic properties of FNAC defining “malignant” and “suspicious for malignancy” categories as malignant were as follows: sensitivity—64.7%, specificity—97.6%, and accuracy—92.7%. Conclusion: The Bethesda classification had high diagnostic accuracy, with the risk of malignancy consistent with the Bethesda findings. Classifying malignancy as “malignant” and “suspicious for malignancy” yielded the most favorable diagnostic properties for FNAC

Academic Output in Global Surgery after the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery: A Scoping Review

Abstract Background The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery (LCoGS) published its seminal report in 2015, carving a niche for global surgery academia. Six years after the LCoGS, a scoping review was conducted to see how the term 'global surgery' is characterized by the literature and how it relates to LCoGS and its domains. Methods PubMed was searched for publications between January 2015 and February 2021 that used the term ‘global surgery’ in the title, abstract, or key words or cited the LCoGS. Variables extracted included LCoGS domains, authorship metrics, geographic scope, and clinical specialty. Results The search captured 938 articles that qualified for data extraction. Nearly 80% of first and last authors had high-income country affiliations. Africa was the most frequently investigated region, though many countries within the region were under-represented. The World Journal of Surgery was the most frequent journal, publishing 13.9% of all articles. General surgery, pediatric surgery, and neurosurgery were the most represented specialties. Of the LCoGS domains, healthcare delivery and management were the most studied, while economics and financing were the least studied. Conclusion A lack of consensus on the definition of global surgery remains. Additional research is needed in economics and financing, while obstetrics and trauma are under-represented in literature using the term ‘global surgery’. Efforts in academic global surgery must give a voice to those carrying the global surgery agenda forward on the frontlines. Focusing on research capacity-building and encouraging contribution by local partners will lead to a stronger, more cohesive global surgery community. </jats:sec

An OxPLORE Initiative Evaluating Children’s Surgery Resources Worldwide: A Cross-sectional Implementation of the OReCS Document

Abstract Background The Global Initiative for Children's Surgery (GICS) group produced the Optimal Resources for Children’s Surgery (OReCS) document in 2019, listing standards of children’s surgical care by level of healthcare facilities within low resource settings. We have previously created and piloted an audit tool based on the OReCS criteria in a high-income setting. In this study, we aimed to validate its use in identifying gaps in children’s surgery provision worldwide. Methods Our OReCS audit tool was implemented in 10 hospitals providing children’s surgery across eight countries. Collaborators were recruited via the Oxford Paediatrics Linking Our Research with Electives (OxPLORE) international network of medical students and trainees. The audit tool measured a hospital’s current capacity for children’s surgery. Data were analysed firstly to express the percentage of ‘essential’ criteria met for each specialty. Secondly, the ‘OxPLORE method’ was used to allocate each hospital specialty a level based on procedures performed and resources available. A User Evaluation Tool (UET) was developed to obtain feedback on the ease of use of the tool. Results The percentage of essential criteria met within each category varied widely between hospitals. The level given to hospitals for subspecialties based on OReCS criteria often did not reflect their self-defined level. The UET indicated the audit tool was practicable across multiple settings. Conclusions We recommend the use of the OReCS criteria to identify areas for local hospital improvement and inform national children’s surgical plans. We have made informed suggestions to increase usability of the OReCS audit tool. </jats:sec

Academic global surgical competencies: A modified Delphi consensus study.

Academic global surgery is a rapidly growing field that aims to improve access to safe surgical care worldwide. However, no universally accepted competencies exist to inform this developing field. A consensus-based approach, with input from a diverse group of experts, is needed to identify essential competencies that will lead to standardization in this field. A task force was set up using snowball sampling to recruit a broad group of content and context experts in global surgical and perioperative care. A draft set of competencies was revised through the modified Delphi process with two rounds of anonymous input. A threshold of 80% consensus was used to determine whether a competency or sub-competency learning objective was relevant to the skillset needed within academic global surgery and perioperative care. A diverse task force recruited experts from 22 countries to participate in both rounds of the Delphi process. Of the n = 59 respondents completing both rounds of iterative polling, 63% were from low- or middle-income countries. After two rounds of anonymous feedback, participants reached consensus on nine core competencies and 31 sub-competency objectives. The greatest consensus pertained to competency in ethics and professionalism in global surgery (100%) with emphasis on justice, equity, and decolonization across multiple competencies. This Delphi process, with input from experts worldwide, identified nine competencies which can be used to develop standardized academic global surgery and perioperative care curricula worldwide. Further work needs to be done to validate these competencies and establish assessments to ensure that they are taught effectively

Academic global surgical competencies: A modified Delphi consensus study

Academic global surgery is a rapidly growing field that aims to improve access to safe surgical care worldwide. However, no universally accepted competencies exist to inform this developing field. A consensus-based approach, with input from a diverse group of experts, is needed to identify essential competencies that will lead to standardization in this field. A task force was set up using snowball sampling to recruit a broad group of content and context experts in global surgical and perioperative care. A draft set of competencies was revised through the modified Delphi process with two rounds of anonymous input. A threshold of 80% consensus was used to determine whether a competency or sub-competency learning objective was relevant to the skillset needed within academic global surgery and perioperative care. A diverse task force recruited experts from 22 countries to participate in both rounds of the Delphi process. Of the n = 59 respondents completing both rounds of iterative polling, 63% were from low- or middle-income countries. After two rounds of anonymous feedback, participants reached consensus on nine core competencies and 31 sub-competency objectives. The greatest consensus pertained to competency in ethics and professionalism in global surgery (100%) with emphasis on justice, equity, and decolonization across multiple competencies. This Delphi process, with input from experts worldwide, identified nine competencies which can be used to develop standardized academic global surgery and perioperative care curricula worldwide. Further work needs to be done to validate these competencies and establish assessments to ensure that they are taught effectively

Correction: Academic global surgical competencies: A modified Delphi consensus study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0002102.]

Academic global surgical competencies: A modified Delphi consensus study.

Acknowledgements: We would like to thank Natalie Bell and Miranda Melone for managing the email reminders through the ACS OGB Office.Academic global surgery is a rapidly growing field that aims to improve access to safe surgical care worldwide. However, no universally accepted competencies exist to inform this developing field. A consensus-based approach, with input from a diverse group of experts, is needed to identify essential competencies that will lead to standardization in this field. A task force was set up using snowball sampling to recruit a broad group of content and context experts in global surgical and perioperative care. A draft set of competencies was revised through the modified Delphi process with two rounds of anonymous input. A threshold of 80% consensus was used to determine whether a competency or sub-competency learning objective was relevant to the skillset needed within academic global surgery and perioperative care. A diverse task force recruited experts from 22 countries to participate in both rounds of the Delphi process. Of the n = 59 respondents completing both rounds of iterative polling, 63% were from low- or middle-income countries. After two rounds of anonymous feedback, participants reached consensus on nine core competencies and 31 sub-competency objectives. The greatest consensus pertained to competency in ethics and professionalism in global surgery (100%) with emphasis on justice, equity, and decolonization across multiple competencies. This Delphi process, with input from experts worldwide, identified nine competencies which can be used to develop standardized academic global surgery and perioperative care curricula worldwide. Further work needs to be done to validate these competencies and establish assessments to ensure that they are taught effectively

Modified Delphi process for consensus driven development of global surgery competencies.

OGB: American College of Surgeons Operation Giving Back.</p

Demographic and clinical training characteristics of Delphi participants.

Demographic and clinical training characteristics of Delphi participants.</p

Republished, corrected article.

Correction: Academic global surgical competencies: A modified Delphi consensus study</p