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

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

Prevalence, years lived with disability, and trends in anaemia burden by severity and cause, 1990-2021: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021

Background Anaemia is a major health problem worldwide. Global estimates of anaemia burden are crucial for developing appropriate interventions to meet current international targets for disease mitigation. We describe the prevalence, years lived with disability, and trends of anaemia and its underlying causes in 204 countries and territories. Methods We estimated population-level distributions of haemoglobin concentration by age and sex for each location from 1990 to 2021. We then calculated anaemia burden by severity and associated years lived with disability (YLDs). With data on prevalence of the causes of anaemia and associated cause-specific shifts in haemoglobin concentrations, we modelled the proportion of anaemia attributed to 37 underlying causes for all locations, years, and demographics in the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. Findings In 2021, the global prevalence of anaemia across all ages was 24·3% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 23·9–24·7), corresponding to 1·92 billion (1·89–1·95) prevalent cases, compared with a prevalence of 28·2% (27·8–28·5) and 1·50 billion (1·48–1·52) prevalent cases in 1990. Large variations were observed in anaemia burden by age, sex, and geography, with children younger than 5 years, women, and countries in sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia being particularly affected. Anaemia caused 52·0 million (35·1–75·1) YLDs in 2021, and the YLD rate due to anaemia declined with increasing Socio-demographic Index. The most common causes of anaemia YLDs in 2021 were dietary iron deficiency (cause-specific anaemia YLD rate per 100 000 population: 422·4 [95% UI 286·1–612·9]), haemoglobinopathies and haemolytic anaemias (89·0 [58·2–123·7]), and other neglected tropical diseases (36·3 [24·4–52·8]), collectively accounting for 84·7% (84·1–85·2) of anaemia YLDs. Interpretation Anaemia remains a substantial global health challenge, with persistent disparities according to age, sex, and geography. Estimates of cause-specific anaemia burden can be used to design locally relevant health interventions aimed at improving anaemia management and prevention. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

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

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

Aspirin in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in the Women’s Health Study: Effect of noncompliance

Randomized evidence for aspirin in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among women is limited and suggests at most a modest effect for total CVD. Lack of compliance, however, can null-bias estimated effects. We used marginal structural models (MSMs) to estimate the etiologic effect of continuous aspirin use on CVD events among 39,876 apparently healthy female health professionals aged 45 years and older in the Women’s Health Study, a randomized trial of 100 mg aspirin every other day versus placebo. As-treated analyses and MSMs controlled for time-varying determinants of aspirin use and CVD. Predictors of aspirin use differed by randomized group and prior use and included medical history, CVD risk factors, and intermediate CVD events. Previously reported intent-to-treat analyses found small non-significant effects of aspirin on total CVD (hazard ratio (HR) =0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) =0.81–1.03) and CVD mortality (HR=0.95, 95% CI=0.74–1.22). As-treated analyses were similar for total CVD with a slight reduction in CVD mortality (HR=0.88, 95%CI=0.67–1.16). MSMs, which adjusted for non-compliance, were similar for total CVD (HR=0.93; 95% CI: 0.81, 1.07) but suggested lower CVD mortality with aspirin use (HR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.54, 1.08). Adjusting for non-compliance had little impact on the estimated effect of aspirin on total CVD, but strengthened the effect on CVD mortality. These results support a limited effect of low-dose aspirin on total CVD in women, but potential benefit for CVD mortality