What factors influence the production of orthopaedic research in East Africa? A qualitative analysis of interviews.

BACKGROUND: Research addressing the burden of musculoskeletal disease in low- and middle-income countries does not reflect the magnitude of the epidemic in these countries as only 9% of the world's biomedical resources are devoted to addressing problems that affect the health of 90% of the world's population. Little is known regarding the barriers to and drivers of orthopaedic surgery research in such resource-poor settings, the knowledge of which would help direct specific interventions for increasing research capacity and help surgeons from high-income countries support the efforts of our colleagues in low- and middle-income countries. PURPOSE: We sought to identify through surveying academic orthopaedic surgeons in East Africa: (1) barriers impeding research, (2) factors that support or drive research, and (3) factors that were identified by some surgeons as barriers and others as drivers (what we term barrier-driver overlap) as they considered the production of clinical research in resource-poor environments. MATERIALS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 21 orthopaedic surgeon faculty members at four academic medical centers in Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda. Qualitative content analysis of the interviews was conducted using methods based in grounded theory. Grounded theory begins with qualitative data, such as interview transcripts, and analyzes the data for repeated ideas or concepts which then are coded and grouped into categories which allow for identification of subjects or problems that may not have been apparent previously to the interviewer. RESULTS: We identified and quantified 19 barriers to and 21 drivers of orthopaedic surgery research (mentioned n = 1688 and n = 1729, respectively). Resource, research process, and institutional domains were identified to categorize the barriers (n = 7, n = 5, n = 7, respectively) and drivers (n = 7, n = 8, n = 6, respectively). Resource barriers (46%) were discussed more often by interview subjects compared with the research process (26%) and institutional barriers (28%). Drivers of research discussed at least once were proportionally similar across the three domains. Some themes such as research ethics boards, technology, and literature access occurred with similar frequency as barriers to and drivers of orthopaedic surgery research. CONCLUSIONS: The barriers we identified most often among East African academic orthopaedic faculty members focused on resources to accomplish research, followed by institutional barriers, and method or process barriers. Drivers to be fostered included a desire to effect change, collaboration with colleagues, and mentorship opportunities. The identified barriers and drivers of research in East Africa provide a targeted framework for interventions and collaborations with surgeons and organizations from high-resource settings looking to be involved in global health.

The implementation of a pilot femur fracture registry at Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital: an analysis of data quality and barriers to collaborative capacity-building.

BACKGROUND: Trauma registries are essential for injury surveillance and recognition of the burden of musculoskeletal injury in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The purpose of this study was to pilot a femur fracture registry at Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital (KATH) to assess data quality and determine the barriers to research partnering in LMICs. METHODS: All patients admitted to KATH with a fracture of the femur, or Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) class 31, 32, 33, were entered into a locally designed, electronic femur fracture database. Patients' characteristics and data quality were assessed by using descriptive statistics. Orthopedic trauma research barriers and opportunities were identified from key informants at the research site and supporting site. RESULTS: Ninety-six femur fracture patients were enrolled into the registry over a 5-week period. The majority of patients resided in the Ashanti region surrounding the hospital (78 %). Most participants were involved in a road traffic crash (58 %) and physiologically stable with a Cape Triage Score of yellow upon admission (84 %). AO class 32 femur fractures represented the majority of femur fractures (78 %). Median times from injury to admission, admission to surgery, and surgery to discharge were 0, 5, and 10 days, respectively. Data quality analysis showed that data collected at admission had higher rates of completion in the database relative to data collected at various follow-up time points. CONCLUSIONS: Data and data quality analyses highlighted characteristics of femur fracture patients presenting to KATH as well as the technological, administrative support, and hospital systems-based challenges of longitudinal data collection in LMICs.

Critically assessing the Haiti earthquake response and the barriers to quality orthopaedic care.

BACKGROUND: Although numerous authors have described surgical experiences following major disasters, little is known regarding the needs of and barriers to care faced by surgeons during such disasters. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore (1) identified and compared recurrent interview themes essential to the disaster response following the 2010 Haiti earthquake; (2) determined the difference in reported disaster equipment management task difficulty between disaster-trained and untrained volunteers; and (3) approximated the quantity of various procedures performed. METHODS: We conducted 14 interviews with selected orthopaedic surgeon volunteers. We also invited the 504 members of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS), who registered as Haiti earthquake volunteers, to complete an online survey; 174 (35%) completed the survey and 131 (26%) were present in Haiti during the 30 days after the earthquake. Recurrent interview themes were identified, quantified, and compared using Poisson regression analysis. The difference in disaster equipment management difficulty scores was determined with a Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: Of 10 recurrent interview themes, group organization (31 occurrences) was mentioned much more often than all but two of the remaining nine themes. Compared with disaster-untrained respondents, equipment management tended to be less challenging for disaster-trained respondents. Transporting to the treatment site and security during storage at the site were less challenging (19.5% and 16.5% decreases, respectively). Revision surgeries, guillotine amputations, fasciotomies, and internal fixations, suggestive of inappropriate disaster care, were frequently reported. CONCLUSIONS: Organizational and training barriers obstructed orthopaedic care delivery immediately after the Haiti earthquake. Disaster training and outcomes require further study to improve care in future catastrophes.