Dataset Information

International consensus recommendations for the optimal prioritisation and distribution of surgical services in low-income and middle-income countries: a modified Delphi process.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To develop consensus statements regarding the regional-level or district-level distribution of surgical services in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) and prioritisation of service scale-up.

Design

This work was conducted using a modified Delphi consensus process. Initial statements were developed by the International Standards and Guidelines for Quality Safe Surgery and Anesthesia Working Group of the Global Alliance for Surgical, Obstetric, Trauma and Anesthesia Care (G4 Alliance) and the International Society of Surgery based on previously published literature and clinical expertise. The Guidance on Conducting and REporting DElphi Studies framework was applied.

Setting

The Working Group convened in Suva, Fiji for a meeting hosted by the Ministry of Health and Medical Services to develop the initial statements. Local experts were invited to participate. The modified Delphi process was conducted through an electronically administered anonymised survey.

Participants

Expert LMIC surgeons were nominated for participation in the modified Delphi process based on criteria developed by the Working Group.

Primary outcome measures

The consensus panel voted on statements regarding the organisation of surgical services, principles for scale-up and prioritisation of scale-up. Statements reached consensus if there was ≥80% agreement among participants.

Results

Fifty-three nominated experts from 27 LMICs voted on 27 statements in two rounds. Ultimately, 26 statements reached consensus and comprise the current recommendations. The statements covered three major themes: which surgical services should be decentralised or regionalised; how the implementation of these services should be prioritised; and principles to guide LMIC governments and international visiting teams in scaling up safe, accessible and affordable surgical care.

Conclusions

These recommendations represent the first step towards the development of international guidelines for the scaling up of surgical services in LMICs. They constitute the best available basis for policymaking, planning and allocation of resources for strengthening surgical systems.

SUBMITTER: Henry JA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9884888 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

International consensus recommendations for the optimal prioritisation and distribution of surgical services in low-income and middle-income countries: a modified Delphi process.

Henry Jaymie A JA Reyes Ana M AM Ameh Emmanuel E Yip Cheng-Har CH Nthumba Peter P Mehes Mira M Lelchuk Ashley A Hollier Larry L Waqainabete Ifereimi I Abdullah Noor Hisham NH Alliance The T Hill Andrew A Ferguson Mark K MK

BMJ open 20230124 1

<h4>Objectives</h4>To develop consensus statements regarding the regional-level or district-level distribution of surgical services in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) and prioritisation of service scale-up.<h4>Design</h4>This work was conducted using a modified Delphi consensus process. Initial statements were developed by the International Standards and Guidelines for Quality Safe Surgery and Anesthesia Working Group of the Global Alliance for Surgical, Obstetric, Trauma and Anesthesia ...[more]

PMID: 36693687

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesBlood transfusion is life-saving for patients experiencing acute blood loss and severe anaemia. In low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), low blood donation rates and unavailability of whole blood and blood components (blood products) impairs timely blood transfusion. To fulfil patient-specific blood orders, a hospital blood transfusion service (HBTS) receives orders from a prescriber for blood transfusion, tests and prepares blood products for the patient. This study sought to describe the current state of LMIC HBTS.DesignA cross-sectional survey explored LMIC HBTS access to blood products, testing methods, policies and structure. Surveys were administered in English, Spanish, French and Russian, followed by a mixed-methods analysis.SettingHBTS within LMICs.ParticipantsFrom among 124 public and private facilities invited to participate, we received 71 (57%) responses. Of these responses, 50 HBTS from 27 LMICs performed on-site blood transfusions.ResultsMost LMIC HBTS perform blood collection to generate blood products for their patients (36/47, 77%); few relied exclusively on an external supply of blood products (11/47, 23%). The primary reason for blood transfusion was adult anaemia for non-malignant conditions (17/112, 15%). Testing methods varied by gross national income per capita. Blood transfusion delays to patients were common (17/30, 57%) attributed to inadequate blood inventories (13/29, 45%). Other barriers included lack of regular clinician education about transfusion (8/29, 28%) and sustainable financial models for the HBTS (4/29, 14%).ConclusionThis survey describes the status of HBTS in diverse LMICs, illustrating that the availability of blood products remains a principal problem, requiring HBTS to generate its own facility's blood supply. Currently, blood shortages are not reported as a patient-specific adverse event making systematic tracking of delays in transfusion difficult. These findings highlight areas for further exploration related to the lack of available blood inventories for transfusions at HBTS in LMICs.

Project description:IntroductionShort interpregnancy interval (IPI) has been linked to adverse pregnancy outcomes. WHO recommends waiting at least 2 years after a live birth and 6 months after miscarriage or induced termination before conception of another pregnancy. The evidence underpinning these recommendations largely relies on data from low/middle-income countries. Furthermore, recent epidemiological investigations have suggested that these studies may overestimate the effects of IPI due to residual confounding. Future investigations of IPI effects in high-income countries drawing from large, population-based data sources are needed to inform IPI recommendations. We aim to assess the impact of IPIs on maternal and child health outcomes in high-income countries.Methods and analysisThis international longitudinal retrospective cohort study will include more than 18 million pregnancies, making it the largest study to investigate IPI in high-income countries. Population-based data from Australia, Finland, Norway and USA will be used. Birth records in each country will be used to identify consecutive pregnancies. Exact dates of birth and clinical best estimates of gestational length will be used to estimate IPI. Administrative birth and health data sources with >99% coverage in each country will be used to identify maternal sociodemographics, pregnancy complications, details of labour and delivery, birth and child health information. We will use matched and unmatched regression models to investigate the impact of IPI on maternal and infant outcomes, and conduct meta-analysis to pool results across countries.Ethics and disseminationEthics boards at participating sites approved this research (approval was not required in Finland). Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences, and will inform recommendations for optimal IPI in high-income countries. Findings will provide important information for women and families planning future pregnancies and for clinicians providing prenatal care and giving guidance on family planning.

Project description:BackgroundInstitutional research mentorship is a form of mentorship whereby institutions foster mentor-mentee relationships. Research mentorship improves research effectiveness and supports relationships. However, resources are needed in order to institutionalize research mentorship tailored to low- and middle- income countries (LMICs). The aim of this study was to develop a consensus document on institutionalizing research mentorship through a modified Delphi process as part of the practical guide development process.MethodsThis study used a two-round modified Delphi process, which is an iterative, structured approach of consensus decision making. Each participant was asked about a series of items related to research mentorship using Likert scale questions. Agreement for each item was pre-defined as ≥80% of participants rating the item as "agree" or "strongly agree." The items that reached agreement, were then discussed during round two at an in-person conference in Ethiopia. A separate group of individuals only participated virtually. For the final consensus survey, response rates and commenting rates (participants who wrote two or more comments) were compared among conference and non-conference participants.ResultsThe Delphi process led to the inception of three main themes in terms of developing research mentorship: leveraging existing resources, measuring and evaluating institutional mentorship, and encouraging a research mentorship life cycle. During the virtual first round, 59% (36/61) participants who were emailed completed the survey. In the second round, conference participants had a response rate of 79% (11/14) compared to non-conference participants with a response rate of 45% (21/47). Conference participants had a 100% (11/11) commenting rate whereas non-conference participants had a 38% (8/21) commenting rate. This study achieved consensus in both survey rounds for all 35 items on the consensus document.ConclusionsThe data suggest that an in-person conference may increase participant engagement. The consensus developed through a modified Delphi method directly informed a practical guide on institutionalizing research mentorship in LMICs.

Project description:BackgroundWhile recommendations for the optimal distribution of surgical services in high-income countries (HICs) exist, it is unclear how these translate to resource-limited settings. Given the significant shortage and maldistribution of surgical workforce and infrastructure in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), the optimal role of decentralization versus regionalization (centralization) of surgical care is unknown. The aim of this study is to review evidence around interventions aimed at redistributing surgical services in LMICs, to guide recommendations for the ideal organization of surgical services.MethodsA narrative-based literature review was conducted to answer this question. Studies published in English between 1997 and 2017 in PubMed, describing interventions to decentralize or regionalize a surgical procedure in a LMIC, were included. Procedures were selected using the Disease Control Priorities' (DCP3) Essential Surgery Package list. Intervention themes and outcomes were analyzed using a narrative, thematic synthesis approach. Primary outcomes included mortality, complications, and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included input measures: workforce and infrastructure, and process measures: facility-based care, surgical volume, and referral rates.ResultsThirty-five studies were included. Nine (33%) of the 27 studies describing decentralization showed an improvement in primary outcomes. The procedures associated with improved outcomes after decentralization included most obstetric, gynecological, and family planning services as well as some minor general surgery procedures. Out of 8 studies on regionalization (centralization), improved outcomes were shown for trauma care in one study and cataract extraction in one study.ConclusionInterventions aimed at decentralizing obstetric care to the district hospital and health center levels have resulted in mortality benefits in several countries. However, more evidence is needed to link service distribution to patient outcomes in order to provide recommendations for the optimal organization of other surgical procedures in LMICs. Considerations for the optimal distribution of surgical procedures should include the acuity of the condition for which the procedure is indicated, anticipated case volume, and required level of technical skills, resources, and infrastructure. These attributes should be considered within the context of each country.

Dataset Information

International consensus recommendations for the optimal prioritisation and distribution of surgical services in low-income and middle-income countries: a modified Delphi process.

Objectives

Design

Setting

Participants

Primary outcome measures

Results

Conclusions

Publications

International consensus recommendations for the optimal prioritisation and distribution of surgical services in low-income and middle-income countries: a modified Delphi process.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets