ObjectiveInjury burden is highest in low-income and middle-income countries. To reduce avoidable deaths, it is necessary to identify health system deficiencies preventing timely, quality care. We ...developed criteria to use verbal autopsy (VA) data to identify avoidable deaths and associated health system deficiencies.SettingAgincourt, a rural Bushbuckridge municipality, Mpumalanga Province, South Africa.ParticipantsAgincourt Health and Socio-Demographic Surveillance System and healthcare providers (HCPs) from local hospitals.MethodsA literature review to explore definitions of avoidable deaths after trauma and barriers to access to care using the ‘three delays framework’ (seeking, reaching and receiving care) was performed. Based on these definitions, this study developed criteria, applicable for use with VA data, for identifying avoidable death and which of the three delays contributed to avoidable deaths. These criteria were then applied retrospectively to the VA-defined category external injury deaths (EIDs—a subset of which are trauma deaths) from 2012 to 2015. The findings were validated by external expert review. Key informant interviews (KIIs) with HCPs were performed to further explore delays to care.ResultsUsing VA data, avoidable death was defined with a focus on survivability, using level of consciousness at the scene and ability to seek care as indicators. Of 260 EIDs (189 trauma deaths), there were 104 (40%) avoidable EIDs and 78 (30%) avoidable trauma deaths (41% of trauma deaths). Delay in receiving care was the largest contributor to avoidable EIDs (61%) and trauma deaths (59%), followed by delay in seeking care (24% and 23%) and in reaching care (15% and 18%). KIIs revealed context-specific factors contributing to the third delay, including difficult referral systems.ConclusionsA substantial proportion of EIDs and trauma deaths were avoidable, mainly occurring due to facility-based delays in care. Interventions, including strengthening referral networks, may substantially reduce trauma deaths.
Awake craniotomy (AC) is a common neurosurgical procedure for the resection of lesions in eloquent brain areas, which has the advantage of avoiding general anesthesia to reduce associated ...complications and costs. A significant resource limitation in low- and middle-income countries constrains the usage of AC.
To review the published literature on AC in African countries, identify challenges, and propose pragmatic solutions by practicing neurosurgeons in Africa.
We conducted a scoping review under Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis-Scoping Review guidelines across 3 databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science). English articles investigating AC in Africa were included.
Nineteen studies consisting of 396 patients were included. Egypt was the most represented country with 8 studies (42.1%), followed by Nigeria with 6 records (31.6%). Glioma was the most common lesion type, corresponding to 120 of 396 patients (30.3%), followed by epilepsy in 71 patients (17.9%). Awake-awake-awake was the most common protocol used in 7 studies (36.8%). Sixteen studies (84.2%) contained adult patients. The youngest reported AC patient was 11 years old, whereas the oldest one was 92. Nine studies (47.4%) reported infrastructure limitations for performing AC, including the lack of funding, intraoperative monitoring equipment, imaging, medications, and limited human resources.
Despite many constraints, AC is being safely performed in low-resource settings. International collaborations among centers are a move forward, but adequate resources and management are essential to make AC an accessible procedure in many more African neurosurgical centers.
Abstract
Background. Endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery has been shown to be a safe and effective treatment option for patients with pituitary tumours, but no study has explored patients' perceptions ...before and after this surgery. Objective. The authors in this study aim to explore patients' perceptions on endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery. Methods. Using qualitative research methodology, two semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 participants who were adults aged > 18 undergoing endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery for the resection of a pituitary tumour between December 2008 and June 2011. The interviews were audiotaped and transcribed. The resulting data was analyzed using a modified thematic analysis. Results. Seven overarching themes were identified: (1) Patients had a positive surgical experience; (2) patients were satisfied with the results of the procedure; (3) patients were initially surprised that neurosurgery could be performed endonasally; (4) patients expected a cure and to feel better after the surgery; (5) many patients feared that something might go wrong during the surgery; (6) patients were psychologically prepared for the surgery; (7) most patients reported receiving adequate pre-op and post-op information. Conclusions. This is the first qualitative study reporting on patients' perceptions before and after an endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal pituitary surgery, which is increasingly used as a standard surgical approach for patients with pituitary tumours. Patients report a positive perception and general satisfaction with the endoscopic transsphenoidal surgical experience. However, there is still room for improvement in post-surgical care. Overall, patients' perceptions can help improve the delivery of comprehensive care to future patients undergoing pituitary tumour surgery.
Background:
Endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery had been shown to be a safe and effective treatment option for patients with pituitary tumors, but there has been no study exploring patients' ...perceptions before and after this surgery.
Objective:
The authors in this study aim to explore patients' perceptions on endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery.
Methods:
Using a qualitative research methodology, two semistructured interviews were conducted with 30 participants. These participants were adults older than 18 years who underwent endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal surgery for the resection of a pituitary tumor between December 2008 and June 2011. The open-ended interviews were audiotaped and transcribed and the resulting data was analyzed using a modified thematic analysis.
Results:
The following seven overarching themes were identified from the data: (1) Patients had a positive surgical experience; (2) patients were satisfied with the results of the procedure; (3) patients were initially surprised that neurosurgery could be performed endonasally; (4) patients expected a cure and to feel better after the surgery; (5) many patients feared that something might go wrong during the surgery; (6) patients were psychologically prepared for the surgery; (7)most patients reported receiving adequate preoperative and postoperative information.
Conclusions:
This is the first qualitative study reporting on patients' perceptions before and after an endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal pituitary surgery, which is increasingly used as a standard surgical approach for patients with pituitary tumors. Patients report a positive perception and general satisfaction with the endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal surgical experience, both preoperatively and postoperatively. However, there is still room for improvement in postsurgical care. Overall, patients' perceptions can help improve the delivery of comprehensive care to future patients undergoing pituitary tumor surgery.
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.
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.
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.
ObjectivesTo use verbal autopsy (VA) data to understand health system utilisation and the potential avoidability associated with fatal injury. Then to categorise any evident barriers driving ...avoidable delays to care within a Three-Delays framework that considers delays to seeking (Delay 1), reaching (Delay 2) or receiving (Delay 3) quality injury care.DesignRetrospective analysis of existing VA data routinely collected by a demographic surveillance site.SettingKaronga Health and Demographic Surveillance Site (HDSS) population, Northern Malawi.ParticipantsFatally injured members of the HDSS.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of fatal injury deaths that were potentially avoidable. Secondary outcomes were the delay stage and corresponding barriers associated with avoidable deaths and the health system utilisation for fatal injuries within the health system.ResultsOf the 252 deaths due to external causes, 185 injury-related deaths were analysed. Deaths were predominantly among young males (median age 30, IQR 11–48), 71.9% (133/185). 35.1% (65/185) were assessed as potentially avoidable. Delay 1 was implicated in 30.8% (20/65) of potentially avoidable deaths, Delay 2 in 61.5% (40/65) and Delay 3 in 75.4% (49/65). Within Delay 1, ‘healthcare literacy’ was most commonly implicated barrier in 75% (15/20). Within Delay 2, ‘communication’ and ‘prehospital care’ were the most commonly implicated in 92.5% (37/40). Within Delay 3, ‘physical resources’ were most commonly implicated, 85.7% (42/49).ConclusionsVA is feasible for studying pathways to care and health system responsiveness in avoidable deaths following injury and ascertaining the delays that contribute to deaths. A large proportion of injury deaths were avoidable, and we have identified several barriers as potential targets for intervention. Refining and integrating VA with other health system assessment methods is likely necessary to holistically understand an injury care health system.
Background
Two randomised trials assessing the effectiveness of decompressive craniectomy (DC) following traumatic brain injury (TBI) were published in recent years: DECRA in 2011 and RESCUEicp in ...2016. As the results have generated debate amongst clinicians and researchers working in the field of TBI worldwide, it was felt necessary to provide general guidance on the use of DC following TBI and identify areas of ongoing uncertainty via a consensus-based approach.
Methods
The International Consensus Meeting on the Role of Decompressive Craniectomy in the Management of Traumatic Brain Injury took place in Cambridge, UK, on the 28th and 29th September 2017. The meeting was jointly organised by the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies (WFNS), AO/Global Neuro and the NIHR Global Health Research Group on Neurotrauma. Discussions and voting were organised around six pre-specified themes: (1) primary DC for mass lesions, (2) secondary DC for intracranial hypertension, (3) peri-operative care, (4) surgical technique, (5) cranial reconstruction and (6) DC in low- and middle-income countries.
Results
The invited participants discussed existing published evidence and proposed consensus statements. Statements required an agreement threshold of more than 70% by blinded voting for approval.
Conclusions
In this manuscript, we present the final consensus-based recommendations. We have also identified areas of uncertainty, where further research is required, including the role of primary DC, the role of hinge craniotomy and the optimal timing and material for skull reconstruction.
BackgroundTwo randomised trials assessing the effectiveness of decompressive craniectomy (DC) following traumatic brain injury (TBI) were published in recent years: DECRA in 2011 and RESCUEicp in ...2016. As the results have generated debate amongst clinicians and researchers working in the field of TBI worldwide, it was felt necessary to provide general guidance on the use of DC following TBI and identify areas of ongoing uncertainty via a consensus-based approach.MethodsThe International Consensus Meeting on the Role of Decompressive Craniectomy in the Management of Traumatic Brain Injury took place in Cambridge, UK, on the 28th and 29th September 2017. The meeting was jointly organised by the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies (WFNS), AO/Global Neuro and the NIHR Global Health Research Group on Neurotrauma. Discussions and voting were organised around six pre-specified themes: (1) primary DC for mass lesions, (2) secondary DC for intracranial hypertension, (3) peri-operative care, (4) surgical technique, (5) cranial reconstruction and (6) DC in low- and middle-income countries.ResultsThe invited participants discussed existing published evidence and proposed consensus statements. Statements required an agreement threshold of more than 70% by blinded voting for approval.ConclusionsIn this manuscript, we present the final consensus-based recommendations. We have also identified areas of uncertainty, where further research is required, including the role of primary DC, the role of hinge craniotomy and the optimal timing and material for skull reconstruction.
PDF
