Interpersonal violence: quantifying the burden of injury in a South African trauma centre

Establishing a consensus on research priorities in orthopaedic trauma within South Africa

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal (MSK) injuries are one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Despite improvements in trauma-related morbidity and mortality in high-income countries over recent years, outcomes following MSK injuries in low- and middle-income countries, such as South Africa (SA), have not. Despite governmental recognition that this is required, funding and research into this significant health burden are limited within SA. This study aims to identify research priorities within MSK trauma care using a consensus-based approach amongst MSK healthcare practitioners within SA.

METHOD

Members from the Orthopaedic Research Collaboration in Africa (ORCA), based in SA, collaborated using a two round modified Delphi technique to form a consensus on research priorities within orthopaedic trauma care. Members involved in the process were orthopaedic healthcare practitioners within SA.

RESULTS

Participants from the ORCA network, working within SA, scored research priorities across two Delphi rounds from low to high priority. We have published the overall top 10 research priorities for this Delphi process. Questions were focused on two broad groups-clinical effectiveness in trauma care and general trauma public health care. Both groups were represented by the top two priorities, with the highest ranked question regarding the overall impact of trauma in SA and the second regarding the clinical treatment of open fractures.

CONCLUSION

This study has defined research priorities within orthopaedic trauma in South Africa. Our vision is that by establishing consensus on these research priorities, policy and research funding will be directed into these areas. This should ultimately improve musculoskeletal trauma care across South Africa and its significant health and socioeconomic impacts.

Identification of risk factors for postoperative pulmonary complications in general surgery patients in a low-middle income country

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are an important cause of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Although risk factors for PPCs have been identified in high-income countries, less is known about PPCs and their risk factors in low- and middle-income countries, such as South Africa. This study examined the incidence of PPCs and their associated risk factors among general surgery patients in a public hospital in the province of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa to inform future quality improvement initiatives to decrease PPCs in this clinical population.

METHODS

A retrospective secondary analysis of adult patients with general surgery admissions from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2017 was conducted using data from the health system's Hybrid Electronic Medical Registry. The sample was comprised of 5352 general surgery hospitalizations. PPCs included pneumonia, atelectasis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary edema, pulmonary embolism, prolonged ventilation, hemothorax, pneumothorax, and other respiratory morbidity which encompassed empyema, aspiration, pleural effusion, bronchopleural fistula, and lower respiratory tract infection. Risk factors examined were age, tobacco use, number and type of pre-existing comorbidities, emergency surgery, and number and type of surgeries. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models were conducted to identify risk factors for developing a PPC.

RESULTS

The PPC rate was 7.8%. Of the 418 hospitalizations in which a patient developed a PPC, the most common type of PPC was pneumonia (52.4%) and the mortality rate related to the PPC was 11.7%. Significant risk factors for a PPC were increasing age, greater number of comorbidities, emergency surgery, greater number of general surgeries, and abdominal surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

PPCs are common in general surgery patients in low- and middle-income countries, with similar rates observed in high-income countries. These complications worsen patient outcomes and increase mortality. Quality improvement initiatives that employ resource-conscious methods are needed to reduce PPCs in low- and middle-income countries.

Equity impact of minimum unit pricing of alcohol on household health and finances among rich and poor drinkers in South Africa

Introduction

South Africa experiences significant levels of alcohol-related harm. Recent research suggests minimum unit pricing (MUP) for alcohol would be an effective policy, but high levels of income inequality raise concerns about equity impacts. This paper quantifies the equity impact of MUP on household health and finances in rich and poor drinkers in South Africa.

Methods

We draw from extended cost-effectiveness analysis (ECEA) methods and an epidemiological policy appraisal model of MUP for South Africa to simulate the equity impact of a ZAR 10 MUP over a 20-year time horizon. We estimate the impact across wealth quintiles on: (i) alcohol consumption and expenditures; (ii) mortality; (iii) government healthcare cost savings; (iv) reductions in cases of catastrophic health expenditures (CHE) and household savings linked to reduced health-related workplace absence.

Results

We estimate MUP would reduce consumption more among the poorest than the richest drinkers. Expenditure would increase by ZAR 353 000 million (1 US$=13.2 ZAR), the poorest contributing 13% and the richest 28% of the increase, although this remains regressive compared with mean income. Of the 22 600 deaths averted, 56% accrue to the bottom two quintiles; government healthcare cost savings would be substantial (ZAR 3.9 billion). Cases of CHE averted would be 564 700, 46% among the poorest two quintiles. Indirect cost savings amount to ZAR 51.1 billion.

Conclusions

A MUP policy in South Africa has the potential to reduce harm and health inequality. Fiscal policies for population health require structured policy appraisal, accounting for the totality of effects using mathematical models in association with ECEA methodology.

Trauma patients at the Helderberg District Hospital emergency centre, South Africa: A descriptive study

INTRODUCTION

Trauma is a substantial component of South Africa's burden of disease. District hospitals provide primary trauma care for a large proportion of this trauma burden, although most studies are in specialised or tertiary settings. The aim was to evaluate the profile of physical trauma patients attending the emergency centre at Helderberg District Hospital, Cape Town.

METHODS

An observational descriptive study was conducted between 1 January and 30 April 2019. Patients with trauma were identified from a register and systematically sampled to achieve a sample size of 377. Retrospective data from medical records was collected and analysed in the Statistical Package for Social Sciences.

RESULTS

Of the 14,873 patients attending the emergency centre 24.6% were trauma related and 381 folders were analysed. Of these patients 30.4% were female and 69.6% male with an average age of 27.8 years. Over 60% of patients used an ambulance to get to the hospital. Sundays were the busiest days with 23.9% of all cases. Intentional trauma accounted for 45.4% of cases and accidental injuries 49.1%. The commonest mechanisms were sharp injuries (27.6%), falls (22.0%) and blunt trauma (19.4%). Intentional trauma made up more than half of all trauma in males, was more prevalent than accidental trauma between 20 and 60 years and resulted in a higher proportion of admissions.

CONCLUSION

There were high levels of intentional trauma, especially involving young males over the weekend, mostly with sharp objects. This trauma burden resulted in high numbers of admissions and transfer to tertiary hospitals. Family physicians and other generalists need to be well trained in trauma resuscitation and stabilisation. District hospital need to be appropriately equipped and supplied to manage trauma. Further research is needed to identify underlying modifiable factors that can be addressed through community-orientated interventions.

Cost-effectiveness of emergency care interventions in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review and appraise the quality of cost-effectiveness analyses of emergency care interventions in low- and middle-income countries.

METHODS

Following the PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched PubMed®, Scopus, EMBASE®, Cochrane Library and Web of Science for studies published before May 2019. Inclusion criteria were: (i) an original cost-effectiveness analysis of emergency care intervention or intervention package, and (ii) the analysis occurred in a low- and middle-income setting. To identify additional primary studies, we hand searched the reference lists of included studies. We used the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards guideline to appraise the quality of included studies.

RESULTS

Of the 1674 articles we identified, 35 articles met the inclusion criteria. We identified an additional four studies from the reference lists. We excluded many studies for being deemed costing assessments without an effectiveness analysis. Most included studies were single-intervention analyses. Emergency care interventions evaluated by included studies covered prehospital services, provider training, treatment interventions, emergency diagnostic tools and facilities and packages of care. The reporting quality of the studies varied.

CONCLUSION

We found large gaps in the evidence surrounding the cost-effectiveness of emergency care interventions in low- and middle-income settings. Given the breadth of interventions currently in practice, many interventions remain unassessed, suggesting the need for future research to aid resource allocation decisions. In particular, packages of multiple interventions and system-level changes represent a priority area for future research.