Trauma Training Courses and Programs in Low- and Lower Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review

Background

Injury is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in low- and lower middle-income countries (LMICs). Trauma training is a cost-effective way to improve injury outcomes. Several trauma programs have been implemented in LMICs; however, their scope and effectiveness remain unclear. In this review, we sought to describe and assess the current state of trauma training in LMICs.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, Cochrane Library, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global for trauma training courses in LMICs. An additional gray literature search was conducted on university, governmental, and non- governmental organizations’ websites to identify trauma-related postgraduate medical education (PGME) opportunities.

Results

Most studies occurred in sub-Saharan Africa and participants were primarily physicians/surgeons, medical students/residents, and nurses. General and surgical trauma management courses were most common, followed by orthopedic trauma or plastic surgery trauma/burn care courses. 32/45 studies reported on participant knowledge and skills, 27 of which had minimal follow-up. Of the four studies commenting on cost of courses, only one demonstrated cost-effectiveness. Three articles evaluated post-course effects on patient outcomes, two of which failed to demonstrate significant improvements. Overall, 43.0% of LMICs have PGME programs with defined trauma competency requirements.

Conclusions

Current studies on trauma training in LMICs do not clearly demonstrate sustainability, cost-effectiveness, nor improved outcomes. Trauma training programs should be in response to a need, championed locally, and work within a cohesive system to demonstrate concrete benefits. We recommend standardized and contextualized trauma training with recertifications in LMICs for lasting and improved trauma care.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00268-021-06283-1.

Primary trauma care course: Alternative basic trauma course in developing countries. "The Need Of The Hour"

OBJECTIVE

Low- and middle-income countries account for over 90% of all road traffic injury deaths. Despite this, formal training in trauma management is not widely adopted in these countries. No specific training was available in prehospital or emergency department for life support before primary trauma care (PTC) course. This study was conducted to assess the effectiveness of the PTC course in the improvement of knowledge and skills of trauma management among participant in Pakistan.

METHOD

Two days of PTC courses were organised and conducted in various regions of Pakistan, participants per course comprising medical students, doctors, house officers, residents, and paramedics. The course comprises lectures of 5 hours and 30 minutes, skills workshops for 3 hours and discussion and multisystem trauma scenarios for 3 hours. Trauma management knowledge and clinical confidence of candidates were assessed using a predetermined multiple-choice questionnaire of 30 MCQs both at pre- and post-course, and using clinical scenarios, confidence matrix was assessed.

RESULTS

A total 7852 of participants were trained, an average of 2 courses per month and 302 total courses. Mean score of pre-course MCQs was 60% and mean score of post-course MCQs was 82%. Among the participant postgraduate trainees, average in trauma knowledge and trauma clinical confidence were significantly higher in both pre- and post-course. The mean score of pre-course confidence matrix was 70% and the mean score of post-course confidence matrix was 93%; at the end of course, all participants showed a high level of confidence in managing trauma mock scenarios. A total of 5889 (75%) participants had a ≥78.5% post-workshop knowledge score. However, only 1963 (25%) participants had a trauma skill score with ≤75 marks.

CONCLUSION

PTC workshop could be an alternative and cost-effective flexible course for gaining knowledge and clinical skills of initial trauma management and strengthening the capacity of trauma management training in developing countries with minimal resources for saving the life of trauma victims.

Assessing trauma care systems in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and evidence synthesis mapping the Three Delays framework to injury health system assessments

BACKGROUND

The large burden of injuries falls disproportionately on low/middle-income countries (LMICs). Health system interventions improve outcomes in high-income countries. Assessing LMIC trauma systems supports their improvement. Evaluating systems using a Three Delays framework, considering barriers to seeking (Delay 1), reaching (Delay 2) and receiving care (Delay 3), has aided maternal health gains. Rapid assessments allow timely appraisal within resource and logistically constrained settings. We systematically reviewed existing literature on the assessment of LMIC trauma systems, applying the Three Delays framework and rapid assessment principles.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and narrative synthesis of articles assessing LMIC trauma systems. We searched seven databases and grey literature for studies and reports published until October 2018. Inclusion criteria were an injury care focus and assessment of at least one defined system aspect. We mapped each study to the Three Delays framework and judged its suitability for rapid assessment.

RESULTS

Of 14 677 articles identified, 111 studies and 8 documents were included. Sub-Saharan Africa was the most commonly included region (44.1%). Delay 3, either alone or in combination, was most commonly assessed (79.3%) followed by Delay 2 (46.8%) and Delay 1 (10.8%). Facility assessment was the most common method of assessment (36.0%). Only 2.7% of studies assessed all Three Delays. We judged 62.6% of study methodologies potentially suitable for rapid assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Whole health system injury research is needed as facility capacity assessments dominate. Future studies should consider novel or combined methods to study Delays 1 and 2, alongside care processes and outcomes.

Development and use of clinical vignettes to assess injury care quality in Northern Malawi

BACKGROUND

It is known that outcomes after injury care in low-and-middle income countries (LMICs) are poorer than those in high income countries. However, little is known about healthcare provider competency to deliver quality injury care in these settings. We developed and used clinical vignettes to evaluate injury care quality in an LMIC setting.

METHOD

Four serious injury scenarios, developed from agreed best practice, testing diagnostic and management skills, were piloted with high and low-income setting clinicians. Scenarios were used with primary and referral facility clinicians in Malawi. Participants described their clinical course of action (assessment, diagnostic, treatment and management approaches) for each scenario, registering one point per agreed best practice response. Mean percentage total scores were calculated and univariable and multivariable comparison made across provider groups, facility types, injury care frequency and training level.

RESULTS

Fourteen Doctors, 51 Clinical Officers, 20 Medical Assistants from 11 facilities participated. Mean percentage total vignette scores varied significantly with clinician provider group (Doctors 63.1% vs Clinical Officers 49.6%, p<0.001, Clinical Officers vs Medical Assistants 39.4% p=0.001). Important care aspects most frequently included or omitted were: following chest injury, 88.2% reported chest drain insertion, 7.1% checked for tracheal deviation; following penetrating abdominal injury and shock, 98.8% secured IV access, 0% mentioned tranexamic acid; following severe head injury, 88.2% proposed CT or neurosurgical transfer, 7.1% ensured normotension; and following isolated open lower leg fracture, 90.1% arranged orthopaedic consultation, 2.4% assessed distal neurological status.

CONCLUSION

These clinical vignettes proved easy to use and collected rich data. This supports their use for assessing and monitoring clinical care quality in other similar settings.

Are Primary Trauma Care (PTC) courses beneficial in low- and middle-income countries - A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Injuries remain an important public health concern, resulting in considerable annual morbidity and mortality. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), the lack of appropriate infrastructure, equipment and skilled personnel compound the burden of injury, leading to higher mortality rates. As Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) courses remain uneconomical and inappropriate in LMICs, the Primary Trauma Care (PTC) course was introduced to provide an alternative that is both sustainable and appropriate to local resources.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in May 2019, utilising MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar. All studies reporting patient related outcomes (mortality and morbidity rates) and course participant related outcomes (knowledge, confidence and skills) in LMICs were included. PRISMA guidelines were adhered to throughout.

RESULTS

Nine observational studies were identified (Level 3 evidence). Six studies reported improved knowledge in injury management post-PTC course (p < 0.05). Two studies reported improvements in confidence (p < 0.05) and one on skill attainment (p < 0.0001). One study reported a reduction in mortality rates post-PTC course (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Departmental, institutional and personal improvements may occur in clinical practice as a result of formal PTC training of trauma team members in LMICs. Further high-quality research is needed to evaluate this course's effects on observed change in clinical practice and patient outcomes. This may require long-term observational and epidemiological studies to assess improvements in morbidity and mortality. PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42019133986.