ABSTRACT
Background: Global emergency medicine (GEM) is situated at the intersection of global health and emergency medicine (EM), which is built upon a history of colonial systems and institutions that continue to reinforce inequities between high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) today. These power imbalances yield disparities in GEM practice, research, and education. Approach: The Global Emergency Medicine Academy (GEMA) of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine formed the Decolonizing GEM Working Group in 2020, which now includes over 100 worldwide members. The mission is to address colonial legacies in GEM and catalyze sustainable changes and recommendations toward decolonization at individual and institutional levels. To develop recommendations to decolonize GEM, the group conducted a nonsystematic review of existing literature on decolonizing global health, followed by in-depth discussions between academics from LMICs and HICs to explore implications and challenges specific to GEM. We then synthesized actionable solutions to provide recommendations on decolonizing GEM. Results: Despite the rapidly expanding body of literature on decolonizing global health, there is little guidance specific to the relatively new field of GEM. By applying decolonizing principles to GEM, we suggest key priorities for improving equity in academic GEM: (1) reframing partnerships to place LMIC academics in positions of expertise and power, (2) redirecting research funding toward LMIC-driven projects and investigators, (3) creating more equitable practices in establishing authorship, and (4) upholding principles of decolonization in the education of EM trainees from LMICs and HICs. Conclusions: Understanding the colonial roots of GEM will allow us to look more critically at current health disparities and identify inequitable institutionalized practices within our profession that continue to uphold these misguided concepts. A decolonized future of GEM depends on our recognition and rectification of colonial-era practices that shape structural determinants of health care delivery and scientific advancement.
ABSTRACT
Purpose of Review: This review will discuss the importance of quality improvement in low- and middle-income settings as well as several potential barriers to these measures. Recent Findings: There is substantial potential for growth in the field of quality improvement in low-resource settings. The extent of quality improvement (QI) research in low-resource settings is limited but expanding. Summary: Patient harm that is attributable to the costs of poor quality is a significant factor in all practice settings but is arguably of greater impact in limited-resource settings. Due to the recognized human, physical, and technological resource limitations in low- and middle-income countries, the delivery of quality healthcare can be variable in many settings, with discrepancies in evidence-based, evidence-informed, and customary care processes. Disparities in training and development of workforce providers exist in addition to limited availability of funding for QI research. Governmental, health ministry, and health system support is also variable. Attention to all of these areas is ultimately necessary to implement affordable and realistic quality improvement initiatives, education, training, and patient safety strategies that can mitigate harms, improve and establish more reliable outcomes, and develop a culture of safety to grow more sustainable and effective workforces and systems.
