27 research outputs found

    Laparoscopy in management of appendicitis in high-, middle-, and low-income countries: a multicenter, prospective, cohort study.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Appendicitis is the most common abdominal surgical emergency worldwide. Differences between high- and low-income settings in the availability of laparoscopic appendectomy, alternative management choices, and outcomes are poorly described. The aim was to identify variation in surgical management and outcomes of appendicitis within low-, middle-, and high-Human Development Index (HDI) countries worldwide. METHODS: This is a multicenter, international prospective cohort study. Consecutive sampling of patients undergoing emergency appendectomy over 6 months was conducted. Follow-up lasted 30 days. RESULTS: 4546 patients from 52 countries underwent appendectomy (2499 high-, 1540 middle-, and 507 low-HDI groups). Surgical site infection (SSI) rates were higher in low-HDI (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.33-4.99, p = 0.005) but not middle-HDI countries (OR 1.38, 95% CI 0.76-2.52, p = 0.291), compared with high-HDI countries after adjustment. A laparoscopic approach was common in high-HDI countries (1693/2499, 67.7%), but infrequent in low-HDI (41/507, 8.1%) and middle-HDI (132/1540, 8.6%) groups. After accounting for case-mix, laparoscopy was still associated with fewer overall complications (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.42-0.71, p < 0.001) and SSIs (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.14-0.33, p < 0.001). In propensity-score matched groups within low-/middle-HDI countries, laparoscopy was still associated with fewer overall complications (OR 0.23 95% CI 0.11-0.44) and SSI (OR 0.21 95% CI 0.09-0.45). CONCLUSION: A laparoscopic approach is associated with better outcomes and availability appears to differ by country HDI. Despite the profound clinical, operational, and financial barriers to its widespread introduction, laparoscopy could significantly improve outcomes for patients in low-resource environments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02179112

    Pooled analysis of WHO Surgical Safety Checklist use and mortality after emergency laparotomy

    Get PDF
    Background The World Health Organization (WHO) Surgical Safety Checklist has fostered safe practice for 10 years, yet its place in emergency surgery has not been assessed on a global scale. The aim of this study was to evaluate reported checklist use in emergency settings and examine the relationship with perioperative mortality in patients who had emergency laparotomy. Methods In two multinational cohort studies, adults undergoing emergency laparotomy were compared with those having elective gastrointestinal surgery. Relationships between reported checklist use and mortality were determined using multivariable logistic regression and bootstrapped simulation. Results Of 12 296 patients included from 76 countries, 4843 underwent emergency laparotomy. After adjusting for patient and disease factors, checklist use before emergency laparotomy was more common in countries with a high Human Development Index (HDI) (2455 of 2741, 89.6 per cent) compared with that in countries with a middle (753 of 1242, 60.6 per cent; odds ratio (OR) 0.17, 95 per cent c.i. 0.14 to 0.21, P <0001) or low (363 of 860, 422 per cent; OR 008, 007 to 010, P <0.001) HDI. Checklist use was less common in elective surgery than for emergency laparotomy in high-HDI countries (risk difference -94 (95 per cent c.i. -11.9 to -6.9) per cent; P <0001), but the relationship was reversed in low-HDI countries (+121 (+7.0 to +173) per cent; P <0001). In multivariable models, checklist use was associated with a lower 30-day perioperative mortality (OR 0.60, 0.50 to 073; P <0.001). The greatest absolute benefit was seen for emergency surgery in low- and middle-HDI countries. Conclusion Checklist use in emergency laparotomy was associated with a significantly lower perioperative mortality rate. Checklist use in low-HDI countries was half that in high-HDI countries.Peer reviewe

    Global variation in anastomosis and end colostomy formation following left-sided colorectal resection

    Get PDF
    Background End colostomy rates following colorectal resection vary across institutions in high-income settings, being influenced by patient, disease, surgeon and system factors. This study aimed to assess global variation in end colostomy rates after left-sided colorectal resection. Methods This study comprised an analysis of GlobalSurg-1 and -2 international, prospective, observational cohort studies (2014, 2016), including consecutive adult patients undergoing elective or emergency left-sided colorectal resection within discrete 2-week windows. Countries were grouped into high-, middle- and low-income tertiles according to the United Nations Human Development Index (HDI). Factors associated with colostomy formation versus primary anastomosis were explored using a multilevel, multivariable logistic regression model. Results In total, 1635 patients from 242 hospitals in 57 countries undergoing left-sided colorectal resection were included: 113 (6·9 per cent) from low-HDI, 254 (15·5 per cent) from middle-HDI and 1268 (77·6 per cent) from high-HDI countries. There was a higher proportion of patients with perforated disease (57·5, 40·9 and 35·4 per cent; P < 0·001) and subsequent use of end colostomy (52·2, 24·8 and 18·9 per cent; P < 0·001) in low- compared with middle- and high-HDI settings. The association with colostomy use in low-HDI settings persisted (odds ratio (OR) 3·20, 95 per cent c.i. 1·35 to 7·57; P = 0·008) after risk adjustment for malignant disease (OR 2·34, 1·65 to 3·32; P < 0·001), emergency surgery (OR 4·08, 2·73 to 6·10; P < 0·001), time to operation at least 48 h (OR 1·99, 1·28 to 3·09; P = 0·002) and disease perforation (OR 4·00, 2·81 to 5·69; P < 0·001). Conclusion Global differences existed in the proportion of patients receiving end stomas after left-sided colorectal resection based on income, which went beyond case mix alone

    Pulmonary rehabilitation for COPD: A narrative review and call for further implementation in Saudi Arabia

    Get PDF
    Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common, preventable, and treatable condition, in which outcomes can be improved with careful management. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) comprises exercise and education, delivered by multidisciplinary teams. PR is a cost-effective management strategy in COPD patients which improves exercise performance, reduces dyspnea, reduces the risk of exacerbation, and improves health-related quality of life. All COPD patients appear to benefit irrespective of their baseline function, and PR has also been shown to be a clinically and cost-effective management approach following an acute exacerbation. COPD patients with greater disability and those recovering postexacerbation should be specifically targeted for PR. Due to limited current capacity, the latter group may not currently be able to benefit from PR. Therefore, there is a need for the wider implementation of PR services in Saudi Arabia, requiring us to address challenges including capacity and workforce competency

    Knowledge of Common Symptoms of Rheumatic Diseases and Causes of Delayed Diagnosis in Saudi Arabia

    No full text
    Bader A Al-Mehmadi,1 May Musaad M Alelaiwi,2 Haya Sulaiman A Alnumayr,3 Basil Saeed Alghamdi,4 Bandar Abdullah Alomari,4 Hayat Saleh Alzahrani5 1Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Majmaah University, Al-Majmaah, 11952, Saudi Arabia; 2College of Medicine, Majmaah University, Al-Majmaah, Saudi Arabia; 3College of Medicine, Qassim University, Buraydah, Saudi Arabia; 4Department of Internal Medicine, King Fahad Hospital, Medina, Saudi Arabia; 5Department of Family and Community Medicine, College of Medicine, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, Saudi ArabiaCorrespondence: Hayat Saleh Alzahrani, Department of Family and Community Medicine, College of Medicine, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, P.O. Box 84428, Riyadh, 11671, Saudi Arabia, Tel +96611822000, Email [email protected]; [email protected]: The aim of this study is to determine the general population’s knowledge on the different symptoms of rheumatic diseases, the key factors for diagnosis delays from the patient’s perspective, the length of delay from the onset of symptoms to the diagnosis, and the effect this holds on the disease activity, response to therapy, and the development of complications and nonreversible deformities in patients diagnosed with rheumatic diseases.Patients and Methods: This is a cross-sectional study. Our target study population were the residents of Saudi Arabia. Data were collected via an online questionnaire and analyzed with SPSS.Results: The overall prevalence of rheumatic disease in our cohort was 8.7%. Joint pain (75.7%), joint swelling (47.1%) and morning stiffness (32.9%) were the first and most common presenting symptom. Persistence of symptoms (N=32, 45.7%) and symptom worsening (N=21, 30.0%) was the predominant cause to visit rheumatologist. The duration between first symptom and rheumatic disease diagnosis is significantly longer for patients aged < 50 years compared to that of those with ≥ 50 years of age. Results show that 36.4% of patients aged ≥ 50 years had delayed diagnosis due to late appointment compared with 5.7% of patients aged < 50 years. In addition, patients with longer duration of symptoms were likely to have more visits to the rheumatologist. Most of the participants of < 50 years significantly agreed that rheumatologists treat autoimmune diseases, only a few approved that they treat muscle problems.Conclusion: Most participants in our study have lesser knowledge about their symptoms and they did not know where to consult for the treatment of their disease. This caused unnecessary delays and worsening and aggravation of the symptoms. There is an increased need to organize an awareness campaign in the general population regarding autoimmune and rheumatic diseases.Keywords: rheumatic diseases, delayed diagnosis, misdiagnosis, referrals, consultations, Saudi Arabi
    corecore