Building Trauma and EMS Systems Capacity in Rwanda: Lessons and Recommendations

Evaluating Global Surgery Partnerships From Low and Middle Income Country Perspectives

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about perceptions of low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) partners regarding global surgery collaborations with high-income countries (HICs).

METHODS

A survey was distributed to surgeons from LMICs to assess the nature and perception of collaborations, funding, benefits, communication, and the effects of COVID-19 on partnerships.

RESULTS

We received 19 responses from LMIC representatives in 12 countries on three continents. The majority (83%) had participated in collaborations within the past 5 y with 39% of collaborations were facilitated virtually. Clinical and educational partnerships (39% each) were ranked most important by respondents. Sustainability of the partnership was most successfully achieved in domains of education/training (78%) and research (61%). The majority (77%) of respondents reported expressing their needs before HIC team arrival. However, 54% of respondents were the ones to initiate the conversation and only 47% said HIC partners understood the overall environment well at arrival to LMIC. Almost all participants (95%) felt a formal process of collaboration and a structured partnership would benefit all parties in assessing needs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, 87% of participants reported continued collaborations; however, 44% of partners felt that relationships were weaker, 31% felt relationships were stronger, and 25% felt they were unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides a snapshot of LMIC surgeons' perspectives on collaboration in global surgery. Independent of location, LMIC partners cite inadequate structure for long-term collaborations. We propose a formal pathway and initiation process to assess resources and needs at the outset of a partnership.

Understanding pediatric surgical needs in North Korea: a modeling analysis

Background

Sixty-five percent of children worldwide lack access to surgical care, the majority of whom live in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Developing surgical infrastructure requires information on surgical need; however, this information is often limited in LMICs. North Korea (Democratic People's Republic of Korea, DPRK) has a low amount of publicly available data. Here, we analyzed available modeled data to understand the causes of pediatric deaths due to conditions treatable with surgery in DPRK.

Methods

We used World Bank data and models from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation to identify causes of pediatric deaths affecting pediatric patients (age <20 years). We compared mortality of disease between DPRK and countries with similar economic status.

Results

Between 1990 and 2019, the number of overall pediatric deaths has decreased. In 2019, 32.2% of all pediatric deaths in DPRK were caused by surgical conditions. The leading categories of surgical conditions were injuries (53.9%), congenital conditions (34.2%), tumors (8.8%), and abdominal conditions (3.2%). DPRK has a lower relative rate of pediatric deaths compared with other LMICs with similar gross domestic product per capita. However, it has a higher relative rate of pediatric deaths due to conditions requiring treatment with surgery. Transport injuries contribute significantly to the high rate of pediatric deaths in DPRK.

Conclusions

Although DPRK may be allocating overall resources toward pediatric healthcare more efficiently than economic peers, DPRK may benefit from improvement in pediatric surgical capacity. Improved availability of data and close international collaboration could be potential solutions to bridge this gap.

Health system assessment for access to care after injury in low- or middle-income countries: A mixed methods study from Northern Malawi

BACKGROUND

Injuries represent a vast and relatively neglected burden of disease affecting low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While many health systems underperform in treating injured patients, most assessments have not considered the whole system. We integrated findings from 9 methods using a 3 delays approach (delays in seeking, reaching, or receiving care) to prioritise important trauma care health system barriers in Karonga, Northern Malawi, and exemplify a holistic health system assessment approach applicable in comparable settings.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

To provide multiple perspectives on each conceptual delay and include data from community-based and facility-based sources, we used 9 methods to examine the injury care health system. The methods were (1) household survey; (2) verbal autopsy analysis; (3) community focus group discussions (FGDs); (4) community photovoice; (5) facility care-pathway process mapping and elucidation of barriers following injury; (6) facility healthcare worker survey; (7) facility assessment survey; (8) clinical vignettes for care process quality assessment of facility-based healthcare workers; and (9) geographic information system (GIS) analysis. Empirical data collection took place in Karonga, Northern Malawi, between July 2019 and February 2020. We used a convergent parallel study design concurrently conducting all data collection before subsequently integrating results for interpretation. For each delay, a matrix was created to juxtapose method-specific data relevant to each barrier identified as driving delays to injury care. Using a consensus approach, we graded the evidence from each method as to whether an identified barrier was important within the health system. We identified 26 barriers to access timely quality injury care evidenced by at least 3 of the 9 study methods. There were 10 barriers at delay 1, 6 at delay 2, and 10 at delay 3. We found that the barriers "cost," "transport," and "physical resources" had the most methods providing strong evidence they were important health system barriers within delays 1 (seeking care), 2 (reaching care), and 3 (receiving care), respectively. Facility process mapping provided evidence for the greatest number of barriers-25 of 26 within the integrated analysis. There were some barriers with notable divergent findings between the community- and facility-based methods, as well as among different community- and facility-based methods, which are discussed. The main limitation of our study is that the framework for grading evidence strength for important health system barriers across the 9 studies was done by author-derived consensus; other researchers might have created a different framework.

CONCLUSIONS

By integrating 9 different methods, including qualitative, quantitative, community-, patient-, and healthcare worker-derived data sources, we gained a rich insight into the functioning of this health system's ability to provide injury care. This approach allowed more holistic appraisal of this health system's issues by establishing convergence of evidence across the diverse methods used that the barriers of cost, transport, and physical resources were the most important health system barriers driving delays to seeking, reaching, and receiving injury care, respectively. This offers direction and confidence, over and above that derived from single methodology studies, for prioritising barriers to address through health service development and policy.

Barriers to equitable access to quality trauma care in Rwanda: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Using the 'Four Delay' framework, our study aimed to identify and explore barriers to accessing quality injury care from the injured patients', caregivers' and community leaders' perspectives.

DESIGN

A qualitative study assessing barriers to trauma care comprising 20 in-depth semistructured interviews and 4 focus group discussions was conducted. The data were analysed thematically.

SETTING

This qualitative study was conducted in Rwanda's rural Burera District, located in the Northern Province, and in Kigali City, the country's urban capital, to capture both the rural and urban population's experiences of being injured.

PARTICIPANTS

Purposively selected participants were individuals from urban and rural communities who had accessed injury care in the previous 6 months or cared for the injured people, and community leaders. Fifty-one participants, 13 females and 38 males ranging from 21 to 68 years of age participated in interviews and focus group discussions. Thirty-six (71%) were former trauma patients with a wide range of injuries including fractured long bones (9, 45%), other fractures, head injury, polytrauma (3, 15% each), abdominal trauma (1, 5%), and lacerations (1, 5%), while the rest were caregivers and community leaders.

RESULTS

Multiple barriers were identified cutting across all levels of the 'Four Delays' framework, including barriers to seeking, reaching, receiving and remaining in care. Key barriers mentioned by participants in both interviews and focus group discussions were: lack of community health insurance, limited access to ambulances, insufficient number of trauma care specialists and a high volume of trauma patients. The rigid referral process and lack of decentralised rehabilitation services were also identified as significant barriers to accessing quality care for injured patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Future interventions to improve access to injury care in Rwanda must be informed by the identified barriers along the spectrum of care, from the point of injury to receipt of care and rehabilitation.

Governance for injury care systems in Ghana, South Africa and Rwanda: development and pilot testing of an assessment tool

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to evaluate health systems governance for injury care in three sub-Saharan countries from policymakers' and injury care providers' perspectives.

SETTING

Ghana, Rwanda and South Africa.

DESIGN

Based on Siddiqi et al's framework for governance, we developed an online assessment tool for health system governance for injury with 37 questions covering health policy and implementation under 10 overarching principles of strategic vision, participation and consensus orientation, rule of law, transparency, responsiveness of institutions, equity, effectiveness or efficiency, accountability, ethics and intelligence and information. A literature review was also done to support the scoring. We derived scores using two methods-investigator scores and respondent scores.

PARTICIPANTS

The tool was sent out to purposively selected stakeholders, including policymakers and injury care providers in Ghana, Rwanda and South Africa. Data were collected between October 2020 and February 2021.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Investigator-weighted and respondent percentage scores for health system governance for injury care. This was calculated for each country in total and per principle.

RESULTS

Rwanda had the highest overall investigator-weighted percentage score (70%), followed by South Africa (59%). Ghana had the lowest overall investigator score (48%). The overall results were similar for the respondent scores. Some areas, such as participation and consensus, scored high in all three countries, while other areas, such as transparency, scored very low.

CONCLUSION

In this multicountry governance survey, we provide insight into and evaluation of health system governance for trauma in three low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in sub-Saharan Africa. It highlights areas of improvement that need to be prioritised, such as transparency, to meet the high burden of trauma and injuries in LMICs.

Challenges Locating the Scene of Emergency: A Qualitative Study of the EMS System in Rwanda

BACKGROUND

Timely prehospital emergency care significantly improves health outcomes. One substantial challenge delaying prehospital emergency care is in locating the patient requiring emergency services. The goal of this study was to describe challenges emergency medical services (EMS) teams in Rwanda face locating emergencies, and explore potential opportunities for improvement.

METHODS

Between August 2021 and April 2022, we conducted 13 in-depth interviews with three stakeholder groups representing the EMS response system in Rwanda: ambulance dispatchers, ambulance field staff, and policymakers. Semi-structured interview guides covered three domains: 1) the process of locating an emergency, including challenges faced; 2) how challenges affect prehospital care; and 3) what opportunities exist for improvement. Interviews lasted approximately 60 min, and were audio recorded and transcribed. Applied thematic analysis was used to identify themes across the three domains. NVivo (version 12) was used to code and organize data.

RESULTS

The current process of locating a patient experiencing a medical emergency in Kigali is hampered by a lack of adequate technology, a reliance on local knowledge of both the caller and response team to locate the emergency, and the necessity of multiple calls to share location details between parties (caller, dispatch, ambulance). Three themes emerged related to how challenges affect prehospital care: increased response interval, variability in response interval based on both the caller's and dispatcher's individual knowledge of the area, and inefficient communication between the caller, dispatch, and ambulance. Three themes emerged related to opportunities for processes and tools to improve the location of emergencies: technology to geolocate an emergency accurately and improve the response interval, improvements in communication to allow for real-time information sharing, and better location data from the public.

CONCLUSION

This study has identified challenges faced by the EMS system in Rwanda in locating emergencies and identified opportunities for intervention. Timely EMS response is essential for optimal clinical outcomes. As EMS systems develop and expand in low-resource settings, there is an urgent need to implement locally relevant solutions to improve the timely locating of emergencies.

Emergency unit capacity in Northern Tanzania: a cross-sectional survey

INTRODUCTION

Emergency medicine (EM) is a growing field in Sub-Saharan Africa. Characterising the current capacity of hospitals to provide emergency care is important in identifying gaps and future directions of growth. This study aimed to characterise the ability of emergency units (EU) to provide emergency care in the Kilimanjaro region in Northern Tanzania.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study conducted at 11 hospitals with emergency care capacity in three districts in the Kilimanjaro region of Northern Tanzania assessed in May 2021. An exhaustive sampling approach was used, whereby all hospitals within the three-district area were surveyed. Hospital representatives were surveyed by two EM physicians using the Hospital Emergency Assessment tool developed by the WHO; data were analysed in Excel and STATA.

RESULTS

All hospitals provided emergency services 24 hours a day. Nine had a designated area for emergency care, four had a core of fixed providers assigned to the EU, two lacked a protocol for systematic triage. For Airway and Breathing interventions, oxygen administration was adequate in 10 hospitals, yet manual airway manoeuvres were only adequate in six and needle decompression in two. For Circulation interventions, fluid administration was adequate in all facilities, yet intraosseous access and external defibrillation were each only available in two. Only one facility had an ECG readily available in the EU and none was able to administer thrombolytic therapy. For trauma interventions, all facilities could immobilise fractures, yet lacked interventions such as cervical spinal immobilisation and pelvic binding. These deficiencies were primarily due to lack of training and resources.

CONCLUSION

Most facilities perform systematic triage of emergency patients, though major gaps were found in the diagnosis and treatment of acute coronary syndrome and initial stabilisation manoeuvres of patients with trauma. Resource limitations were primarily due to equipment and training deficiencies. We recommend the development of future interventions in all levels of facilities to improve the level of training.

The Current Status and Challenges of Prehospital Trauma Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

This review aims to understand the present circumstances on the provision of prehospital trauma care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), particularly scoping the challenges experienced by LMICs in this regard. The objective is to systematically evaluate the currently available evidence on this topic. Based on the themes and challenges identified in the provision of prehospital trauma care in LMICs, we provide a series of recommendations and a knowledge base for future research in the field.

METHODS

A systematic database search was conducted of original articles that explored and reported on prehospital trauma care in LMIC in EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane database, and Google Scholar, from inception to March 2022. All original articles reporting on prehospital trauma care from 2010 to 2022 in LMICs were assessed, excluding case reports, small case series, editorials, abstracts, and pre-clinical studies; those with data inconsistencies that impede data extraction; and those with study populations fewer than ten.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 2,128 articles, of which 29 were included in this review, featuring 27,848 participants from LMICs countries. Four main areas of focus within the studies were identified: (1) exploring emergency service systems, frameworks, and interconnected networks within the context of prehospital trauma care; (2) transportation of patients from the response site to hospital care; (3) medical education and the effects of first responder training in LMICs; and (4) cultural and social factors influencing prehospital trauma care-seeking behaviors. Due to overarching gaps in social and health care systems, significant barriers exist at various stages of providing prehospital trauma care in LMICs, particularly in injury identification, seeking treatment, transportation to hospital, and receiving timely treatment and post-intervention support.

CONCLUSION

The provision of prehospital trauma care in LMICs faces significant barriers at multiple levels, largely dependent on wider social, geographic, economic, and political factors impeding the development of such higher functioning systems within health care. However, there have been numerous breakthroughs within certain LMICs in different aspects of prehospital trauma care, supported to varying degrees by international initiatives, that serve as case studies for widespread implementation and targets. Such experiential learning is essential due to the heterogenous landscapes that comprise LMICs.

Physicians’ experiences and perceived challenges working in an emergency setting in Bharatpur, Nepal: a qualitative study

Background

Emergency medical care, including prehospital treatment, forms an important component of any healthcare system. Like most low-middle-income countries, Nepal has an emergency medical system that can be described as underdeveloped. Emergency physicians navigating this system may experience challenges or barriers in their treatment of patients. This study aimed to investigate physicians’ perspectives on emergency and prehospital patient management in a low-income country, Nepal, and to understand the challenges and barriers they perceive in emergency treatment including both the prehospital treatment and the immediate in-hospital treatment at the emergency department.

Methods

Using a qualitative study, eight semi-structured interviews with physicians working in a Nepalese emergency department were performed. The interviews were conducted between September and November 2021 and were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were subsequently analyzed using the systematic text condensation method.

Results

Four main themes and associated sub-themes were identified: (1) patients’ sociocultural, educational, and financial factors (such as financial issues and financial inequality) and regional differences; (2) emergency department’s organization and resources concerning human and material resources, protocols, and guidelines; (3) problems with the emergency department (ED) service’s qualities and availability caused by an insufficient integration of the ED and the EMS, prehospital resources, and financial interests in the EMS; and (4) surrounding healthcare system’s impact on the ED where, especially, the levels of organized primary care, governmental responsibilities, and healthcare structure were addressed.

Conclusions

The physicians identified numerous regularly encountered challenges and barriers. These challenges stretched beyond the ED and into various aspects of society. The patients’ financial problems were described as the greatest problem, restricting the treatment due to a given patient’s inability or unwillingness to pay for the required procedures. The physicians were thus restricted in completing their duties to the desired levels. The low quality of prehospital care and a lack of education and awareness of common diseases and symptoms in a significant proportion of patients were identified by many participants as being significant issues. The aforementioned challenges or barriers directly resulted in patients arriving in critical conditions that could have been avoided if the disease were treated earlier.