High quality care following orthopaedic injury in Zambia:A qualitative, patient-centred study

Background: Injuries are a significant cause of mortality and morbidity, particular in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While there is a focus on increasing injury care capacity, less attention is given to assessing, improving, and understanding the quality of care provided, especially from a patient perspective. This study therefore aims to understand what patients from a Zambian orthopaedic ward believe good quality care to be, to identify its key components, and contribute to better understanding what patients believe local healthcare priorities could be.Methods: Patients admitted to the orthopaedic ward of a Zambian tertiary care hospital were invited to take part in-depth face-to-face interviews. Interviews were continued until thematic saturation was achieved. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. Analysis was done using an inductive grounded theory approach.Results: Of 13 patients approached, 12 consented to take part. Analysis of the themes from the transcripts led to the emergence of four core categories of quality care which are important to the patient: i) restoring the patient to normality (category: ‘restoring normality’), ii) establishing trust between patients and providers (‘trusting the provider’), iii) respecting the patient and allowing them to maintain autonomy (‘autonomy and respect’) iv) finding ways for patients to enjoy their time in the hospital (‘enjoying life’). From these results, a patient perspective theory of quality care emerged. This theory posits the idea that high-quality care in this context needs to fulfil these four core categories. Additionally, these core categories were ranked on significance and priority.Conclusion: The hierarchy of core categories could help to identify areas to improve care quality in this setting. Not only has this study helped to determine local priorities for achieving high-quality care but can encourage others to test injured patient perceptions of care quality in comparable settings

Review of Management of Ileosigmoid Knotting

Ileosigmoid knotting (ISK) is a rare type of intestinal obstruction caused by knotting of the mesentery of the ileum or sigmoid colon that rapidly progresses to gangrene with a high risk of mortality and high morbidity. The incidence of ISK is not well established, but it is higher in regions with high rates of sigmoid volvulus and in countries along the sigmoid belt. Clinical presentation is that of both small-bowel and large bowel obstruction and includes vomiting and nausea, abdominal pain, tenderness, and distention, with constipation. A contrast-enhanced computer tomography (CT) scan is the preferred modality for imaging. Management involves hemodynamic stabilisation with correction of shock using aggressive fluid resuscitation, electrolyte balance and commencement of antibiotics. Principles of surgery include resection of the knot, resection of the gangrenous bowel and establishing intestinal continuity. The outcome is generally complicated by peritonitis and sepsis that lead to mortality.</jats:p

Effects of hospital facilities on patient outcomes after cancer surgery: an international, prospective, observational study

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 licenseBackground: Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide. Methods: A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study—a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3·85 [95% CI 2·58–5·75]; p<0·0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63·0% vs 82·7%; OR 0·35 [0·23–0·53]; p<0·0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer. Interpretation: Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research

Global variation in postoperative mortality and complications after cancer surgery: a multicentre, prospective cohort study in 82 countries

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licenseBackground: 80% of individuals with cancer will require a surgical procedure, yet little comparative data exist on early outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared postoperative outcomes in breast, colorectal, and gastric cancer surgery in hospitals worldwide, focusing on the effect of disease stage and complications on postoperative mortality. Methods: This was a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients undergoing surgery for primary breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer requiring a skin incision done under general or neuraxial anaesthesia. The primary outcome was death or major complication within 30 days of surgery. Multilevel logistic regression determined relationships within three-level nested models of patients within hospitals and countries. Hospital-level infrastructure effects were explored with three-way mediation analyses. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03471494. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and Jan 31, 2019, we enrolled 15 958 patients from 428 hospitals in 82 countries (high income 9106 patients, 31 countries; upper-middle income 2721 patients, 23 countries; or lower-middle income 4131 patients, 28 countries). Patients in LMICs presented with more advanced disease compared with patients in high-income countries. 30-day mortality was higher for gastric cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (adjusted odds ratio 3·72, 95% CI 1·70–8·16) and for colorectal cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (4·59, 2·39–8·80) and upper-middle-income countries (2·06, 1·11–3·83). No difference in 30-day mortality was seen in breast cancer. The proportion of patients who died after a major complication was greatest in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (6·15, 3·26–11·59) and upper-middle-income countries (3·89, 2·08–7·29). Postoperative death after complications was partly explained by patient factors (60%) and partly by hospital or country (40%). The absence of consistently available postoperative care facilities was associated with seven to 10 more deaths per 100 major complications in LMICs. Cancer stage alone explained little of the early variation in mortality or postoperative complications. Interpretation: Higher levels of mortality after cancer surgery in LMICs was not fully explained by later presentation of disease. The capacity to rescue patients from surgical complications is a tangible opportunity for meaningful intervention. Early death after cancer surgery might be reduced by policies focusing on strengthening perioperative care systems to detect and intervene in common complications. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit