Anaesthetic research in low- and middle-income countries

A novel global safe surgery mentorship program using a multidisciplinary team approach

BACKGROUND

The global surgery movement aims to provide equitable surgical care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and attempts to address a wide range of issues around the lack of access and poor-quality. In response, the Lifebox McCaskey Safe Surgery Fellowship was established in Ethiopia to train a multidisciplinary team of healthcare professionals. We conducted this study to evaluate the outcome of this training program.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted to evaluate the implementations and outcomes of the first three cohorts of the McCaskey Fellowship. Interviews with fellows, mentors, and program staff reveal valuable insights into the program's strengths and challenges.

RESULTS

Key findings include positive feedback on the program's curriculum highlighting its multidisciplinary nature. Challenges were noted in maintaining schedules, communication with healthcare facilities, and budget constraints, suggesting the need for improved program management. The fellowship's impact was evident in altering participants' perceptions of teamwork and enhancing their research and leadership skills. Fellows initiated quality improvement projects impacting surgical practices positively. However, challenges, such as hospital resistance and the COVID-19 pandemic, affected program implementation.

CONCLUSION

Despite various challenges, the program's unique approach combining multidisciplinary training and local mentorship proves promising. It fosters a culture of teamwork, equips participants with essential skills, and encourages fellows to become advocates for safe surgery. As surgical quality champions emerge from this fellowship, there is optimism for lasting positive impacts on surgical care in LMICs.

Anaesthesia provision challenges in public hospitals of Pakistan's Punjab province: a qualitative study of expert perspectives

OBJECTIVES

Anaesthesia delivery in Pakistan remains limited to conventional intraoperative procedures, with research showing ongoing challenges in quality and resourcing. We aimed to identify systemic challenges in the delivery of the WHO-World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists' (WHO-WFSA) 'highly recommended' standards of quality anaesthesia services for surgical support in Pakistan's Punjab province.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

This single-method qualitative study included 22 semistructured interviews with purposively selected anaesthesia system experts in Punjab province, including heads of teaching hospital anaesthesia departments, healthcare commission (HCC) representatives and health department officials. We analysed data thematically, using deductive and inductive coding.

PARTICIPANTS

10 participants worked as anaesthesia department heads of teaching hospitals across Punjab, 5 worked for the HCC and 7 worked for the health department. All were selected purposively and had at least 5 years of experience working as head of department or serving in legislative departments.

RESULTS

We identified three themes experienced as major challenges within the specialty, namely anaesthetist recruitment and retention, quality of care and in-service training, and discrepancies between specialities. Findings indicated that workforce shortages and maldistribution, insufficient in-service training and standards, inadequate equipment maintenance and lack of anaesthesia representation in decision-making compromised anaesthesia provision quality and safety.

CONCLUSIONS

Improving anaesthesia provision in Punjab would require increasing physician and non-physician anaesthetist numbers and rotation to peripheral postings, strengthening training quality and ensuring availability of WFSA-specified essential equipment and supplies. To achieve essential anaesthesia provision standards, policy interventions are needed to, for example, balance anaesthesiologist and surgeon/obstetrician-gynaecologist numbers, require that anaesthesiology postgraduates work a few years in-country (eg, scholarship bonds), ensure in-service training attendance for skills updates and implement quality assurance standards for equipment and supplies.

Trends in country and gender representation on editorial boards in anaesthesia journals: a pooled cross-sectional analysis

Evidence exists that women and people from low- and middle-income countries are under-represented on the editorial boards of medical journals. This may adversely influence the journal output. We conducted a pooled, cross-sectional evaluation of the editorial board membership of anaesthesia journals. We collected data on members of editorial boards from the founding year and at 5-yearly intervals until 2020. For each editor, we recorded gender, country of affiliation, World Bank income classification (1990 onwards) and editorial role (2020 only). The composite editorial board diversity score was calculated for each editorial board. We obtained complete data for the composition of editorial boards from all 30 journals for 2020, but for only 171 out of 304 editorial boards (56%) over the time period examined. In 2020, 409 out of 1973 (21%) were women (range across the editorial boards 0-39%) and 139 out of 1982 (7%) were from low-, low-middle- and upper-middle-income countries (range across the editorial boards 0-71%). In 2020, of editorial board positions with known seniority status, 109 out of 259 (42%) of women and 306 out of 960 (32%) of men were in senior roles. In the same year, 397 out of 1115 (36%) of people from high-income countries were in senior roles, compared with 19 out of 93 (20%) of people from upper-middle-income countries and 0 out of 14 (0%) people from lower-middle-income countries. The median composite editorial board diversity score was 4 (range 2-6) in 2020 - 5 or less suggests poor diversity, while 8 or more suggests good diversity. Women and people from low- and middle-income countries are under-represented on anaesthesia journal editorial boards. The editorial boards do not reflect the anaesthesia workforce and may act as a barrier to the publication of research produced by these groups. Urgent action is required to improve diversity.

Barriers and facilitators to the conduct of critical care research in low and lower-middle income countries: A scoping review

Background

Improvements in health-related outcomes for critically ill adults in low and lower-middle income countries need systematic investments in research capacity and infrastructure. High-quality research has been shown to strengthen health systems; yet, research contributions from these regions remain negligible or absent. We undertook a scoping review to describe barriers and facilitators for the conduct of critical care research.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE up to December 2021 using a strategy that combined keyword and controlled vocabulary terms. We included original studies that reported on barriers or facilitators to the conduct of critical care research in these settings. Two reviewers independently reviewed titles and abstracts, and where necessary, the full-text to select eligible studies. For each study, reviewers independently extracted data using a standardized data extraction form. Barriers and facilitators were classified along the lines of a previous review and based on additional themes that emerged. Study quality was assessed using appropriate tools.

Results

We identified 2693 citations, evaluated 49 studies and identified 6 for inclusion. Of the included studies, four were qualitative, one was a cross-sectional survey and one was reported as an ‘analysis’. The total number of participants ranged from 20–100 and included physicians, nurses, allied healthcare workers and researchers. Barriers identified included limited funding, poor institutional & national investment, inadequate access to mentors, absence of training in research methods, limited research support staff, and absence of statistical support. Our review identified potential solutions such as developing a mentorship network, streamlining of regulatory processes, implementing a centralized institutional research agenda, developing a core-outcome dataset and enhancing access to low-cost technology.

Conclusion

Our scoping review highlights important barriers to the conduct of critical care research in low and lower-middle income countries, identifies potential solutions, and informs researchers, policymakers and governments on the steps necessary for strengthening research systems.

Perioperative mortality in older patients: a systematic review with a meta-regression analysis and meta-analysis of observational studies

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Older patients have a higher probability of developing major complications during the perioperative period than other adult patients. Perioperative mortality depends on not only on a patient condition but also on the quality of perioperative care provided. We tested the hypothesis that the perioperative mortality rate among older patients has decreased over time and is related to a country's Human Development Index (HDI) status.

DESIGN

A systematic review with a meta-regression and meta-analysis of observational studies that reported perioperative mortality rates in patients aged ≥60 years was performed. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS and SciELO databases from inception to December 30, 2019.

SETTING

Mortality rates up to the seventh postoperative day were evaluated.

MEASUREMENTS

We evaluated the quality of the included studies. Perioperative mortality rates were analysed by time, country HDI status and baseline American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status using meta-regression. Perioperative mortality and ASA status were analysed in low- and high-HDI countries during two time periods using proportion meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 studies, which reported 4,412,100 anaesthesia procedures and 3568 perioperative deaths from 12 countries. Perioperative mortality rates in high-HDI countries decreased over time (P = 0.042). When comparing pre-1990 to 1990-2019, in high-HDI countries, the perioperative mortality rates per 10,000 anaesthesia procedures decreased 7.8-fold from 100.85 (95% CI 43.36 to 181.72) in pre-1990 to 12.98 (95% CI 6.47 to 21.70) in 1990-2019 (P < 0.0001). There were no studies from low-HDI countries pre-1990. In the period from 1990 to 2019, perioperative mortality rates did not differ between low- and high-HDI countries (P = 0.395) but the limited number of patients in low-HDI countries impaired the result. Perioperative mortality rates increased with increasing ASA status (P < 0.0001). There were more ASA III-V patients in high-HDI countries than in low-HDI countries (P < 0.0001), and the perioperative mortality rate increased 24-fold in ASA III-V patients compared with ASA I-II patients (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The perioperative mortality rates in older patients have declined over the past 60 years in high-DHI countries, highlighting that perioperative safety in this population is increasing in these countries. Since data prior to 1990 were lacking in low-HDI countries, the evolution of their mortality rates could not be analysed. The perioperative mortality rate was similar in low- and high-HDI countries in the post-1990 period, but the low number of patients in the low-HDI countries does not allow a definitive conclusion.

What is 'global surgery'? Defining the multidisciplinary interface between surgery, anaesthesia and public health

'Global surgery' is the term adopted to describe a rapidly developing multidisciplinary field aiming to provide improved and equitable surgical care across international health systems. Sitting at the interface between numerous clinical and non-clinical specialisms, it encompasses multiple aspects that surround the treatment of surgical disease and its equitable provision across health systems globally. From defining the role of, and need for, optimal surgical care through to identifying barriers and implementing improvement, global surgery has an expansive remit. Advocacy, education, research and clinical components can all involve surgeons, anaesthetists, nurses and allied healthcare professionals working together with non-clinicians, including policy makers, epidemiologists and economists. Long neglected as a topic within the global and public health arenas, an increasing awareness of the extreme disparities internationally has driven greater engagement. Not necessarily restricted to specific diseases, populations or geographical regions, these disparities have led to a particular focus on surgical care in low-income and middle-income countries with the greatest burden and needs. This review considers the major factors defining the interface between surgery, anaesthesia and public health in these settings.