A Systematic Review of Orthopedic Global Outreach Efforts Based on WHO-CHOICE Thresholds

Global Health Inequities in Orthopaedic Care: Perspectives Beyond the US

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The burden of musculoskeletal disease is increasing globally and disproportionately affecting people in low and middle income countries (LMIC). We sought to review global access to orthopaedic care, burden of trauma, research infrastructure, impact of surgical mission trips, implant availability, and the effect of COVID-19 upon the delivery of orthopaedic care worldwide.

RECENT FINDINGS

The majority of people in LMIC do not have access to safe, quality surgical care, and there are few fellowship-trained orthopaedic traumatologists. Road traffic accidents are the leading cause of long bone fractures in LMIC and result in significant morbidity and mortality. Of the orthopaedic literature published globally in the last 10 years, less than 15% had authors from LMIC. There has been growth in surgical mission trips to LMIC, but few organizations have established bidirectional partnerships. Among the challenges to delivering quality musculoskeletal care in LMIC is timely access to quality orthopaedic implants. Implant options in LMIC are more limited and subjected to less rigorous testing and regulation than high income countries (HIC). The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically reduced elective surgeries but saw the increase in telemedicine utilization which has prevailed in both HIC and LMIC. Awareness of global inequities in orthopaedic care is growing. Much can be learned through collaborations between orthopaedic surgeons from HIC and LMIC to advance patient care worldwide. There is a need for high quality, accurate data regarding incidence and prevalence of musculoskeletal disease, care utilization/availability, and postoperative outcomes so resources can be allotted to make orthopaedic care more equitable globally.

Orthopaedic and trauma research in Tanzania: A scoping review

Tanzania is disproportionately burdened by musculoskeletal injuries as it faces unique challenges when dealing with trauma care. This scoping review aims to summarize and assess the current state of orthopaedic and trauma research in Tanzania. By identifying key themes, trends, and gaps in the literature, this review seeks to guide future research initiatives catered specifically to the needs of Tanzania's healthcare system. Utilizing the PRISMA-ScR protocol, OVID Medline, PubMed, and CINAHL databases were searched from inception to June 17, 2023, using keywords such as "Orthopaedics" "Trauma" and "Tanzania". One hundred and ninety-two eligible studies were included and the Arksey and O'Malley framework for scoping studies was followed. There was a notable growth of relevant publications from 2015 onward, with peaks in growth in the years 2019, 2021, and 2020. The studies employed diverse research methodologies, with cross-sectional (n = 41, 21%) and prospective studies (n = 39, 20%) being the most prevalent, and randomized-controlled trials being the least prevalent methodology, making up eight studies (4.2%). The most common study themes were trauma (n = 101, 52.6%), lower extremity (n = 31, 16%), and spine-related issues (n = 27, 14%). Only three studies looked at work-related injuries (1.6%). Road traffic injuries (RTIs) were the most common mechanism of trauma in 77.0% of the trauma focused studies. Fifty-three percent of the studies were conducted by a majority of Tanzanian authors. This scoping review highlights various trends in orthopaedic and trauma research in Tanzania, with a particular emphasis on road traffic-related injuries. Various gaps are explored, including a lack of research on work-related injuries and a paucity of experimental research. Our findings underline areas where future research is warranted. The future of orthopaedic and trauma care in Tanzania depends on the efforts and collaboration of both local and international stakeholders.

Pearls and Pitfalls of an Orthopaedic Mission Trip

Many physicians chose to pursue years of rigorous medical training because of an innate desire to care for others, which often translates into volunteering in their local communities. Some physicians take this a step further by contributing their time and skills to global health delivery through medical mission trips. The need is apparent: a 40-year discrepancy in average life span, 36 deaths versus 4 deaths per 1,000 births in low-income versus high-income countries, and over 70% of preventable pediatric deaths occurring in solely 15 countries. In addition, a remarkable gap exists in the access of care and resources, with the world's poorest countries receiving only 4% of surgical services. Orthopaedic missions are seldom because the cost and complexity of these trips supersede many other specialties. However, the care that orthopaedic surgery can provide restores an individual's function, allowing them to increase productivity in their personal lives and in their community. Addressing this disparity in health care is a great first step, but studies have shown that mission trips may have some serious downfalls. We aim to discuss these downfalls and provide recommendations to mitigate them.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Hepatic Arterial Infusion of FOLFOX Combined Sorafenib for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Portal Vein Invasion

Background

Hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) of oxaliplatin, leucovorin, and fluorouracil (FOLFOX) plus sorafenib has a more desirable effect versus sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with portal vein invasion. However, considering the high cost of hepatic arterial infusion of chemotherapy (HAIC), this study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of HAIC plus sorafenib (SoraHAIC) versus standard care for HCC patients from the Chinese health system perspective.

Methods

A Markov multi-state model was constructed to simulate the disease course and source consumption of SoraHAIC. Costs of primary therapeutic drugs were calculated based on the national bid price, and hepatic artery catheterization fee was collected from the Fujian Provincial Price Bureau. Clinical data, other costs, and utility values were extracted from references. Primary outcomes included life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The robustness of model was verified by uncertainty sensitivity analyses.

Results

SoraHAIC gained 1.18 QALYs (1.68 LYs) at a cost of $65,254, while the effectiveness and cost of sorafenib were 0.52 QALYs (0.79 LYs) and $14,280, respectively. The ICER of SoraHAIC vs sorafenib was $77,132/QALY ($57,153/LY). Parameter that most influenced the ICER was utility of PFS state. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) showed that SoraHAIC was not cost-effective in the WTP threshold of 3*Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita of China ($30,492/QALY). But about 38.8% of the simulations were favorable to SoraHAIC at the WTP threshold of 3*GDP per capita of Beijing ($72,000/QALY). When 3*GDP per capita of Fujian ($47,285/QALY) and Gansu Province ($14,595/QALY) were used as WTP threshold, the acceptability of SoraHAIC was 0.3% and 0%, respectively.

Conclusions

The study results indicated that SoraHAIC was not cost-effective in medium-, and low-income regions of China. In developed areas of China (Beijing), there was a 38.8% probability that the SoraHAIC regimen would be cost-effective.