Defining a Framework and Evaluation Metrics for Sustainable Global Surgical Partnerships: A Modified Delphi Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to use expert consensus to build a concrete and realistic framework and checklist to evaluate sustainability in global surgery partnerships (GSPs). BACKGROUND: Partnerships between high-resourced and low-resourced settings are often created to address the burden of unmet surgical need. Reflecting on the negative, unintended consequences of asymmetrical partnerships, global surgery community members have proposed frameworks and best practices to promote sustainable engagement between partners, though these frameworks lack consensus. This project proposes a cohesive, consensus-driven framework with accompanying evaluation metrics to guide sustainability in GSPs. METHODS: A modified Delphi technique with purposive sampling was used to build consensus on the definitions and associated evaluation metrics of previously proposed pillars (Stakeholder Engagement, Multidisciplinary Collaboration, Context-Relevant Education and Training, Bilateral Authorship, Multisource Funding, Outcome Measurement) of sustainable GSPs. RESULTS: Fifty global surgery experts from 34 countries with a median of 9.5 years of experience in the field of global surgery participated in 3 Delphi rounds. Consensus was achieved on the identity, definitions, and a 47-item checklist for the evaluation of the 6 pillars of sustainability in GSPs. In all, 29% of items achieved consensus in the first round, whereas 100% achieved consensus in the second and third rounds. CONCLUSIONS: We present the first framework for building sustainable GSPs using the input of experts from all World Health Organization regions. We hope this tool will help the global surgery community to find noncolonial solutions to addressing the gap in access to quality surgical care in low-resource settings.

Post-operative outcomes in Indigenous patients in North America and Oceania: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Indigenous Peoples across North America and Oceania experience worse health outcomes compared to non-Indigenous people, including increased post-operative mortality. Several gaps in data exist regarding global differences in surgical morbidity and mortality for Indigenous populations based on geographic locations and across surgical specialties. The aim of this study is to evaluate disparities in post-operative outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Eight electronic databases were searched with no language restriction. Studies reporting on Indigenous populations outside of Canada, the USA, New Zealand, or Australia, or on interventional procedures were excluded. Primary outcomes were post-operative morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes included reoperations, readmission rates, and length of hospital stay. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale was used for quality assessment. Eighty-four unique observational studies were included in this review. Of these, 67 studies were included in the meta-analysis (Oceania n = 31, North America n = 36). Extensive heterogeneity existed among studies and 50% were of poor quality. Indigenous patients had 1.26 times odds of post-operative morbidity (OR = 1.26, 95% CI: 1.10-1.44, p<0.01) and 1.34 times odds of post-operative infection (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.12-1.59, p<0.01) than non-Indigenous patients. Indigenous patients also had 1.33 times odds of reoperation (OR = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.02-1.74, p = 0.04). In conclusion, we found that Indigenous patients in North American and Oceania experience significantly poorer surgical outcomes than their non-Indigenous counterparts. Additionally, there is a low proportion of high-quality research focusing on assessing surgical equity for Indigenous patients in these regions, despite multiple international and national calls to action for reconciliation and decolonization to improve quality surgical care for Indigenous populations.

Postoperative morbidity and mortality in pediatric indigenous populations: a scoping review and meta-analysis.

Mounting evidence suggests that childhood health is an important predictor of wellness as an adult. Indigenous peoples worldwide suffer worse health outcomes compared to settler populations. No study comprehensively evaluates surgical outcomes for Indigenous pediatric patients. This review evaluates inequities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous children globally for postoperative complications, morbidities, and mortality. Nine databases were searched for relevant subject headings including "pediatric", "Indigenous", "postoperative", "complications", and related terms. Main outcomes included postoperative complications, mortality, reoperations, and hospital readmission. A random-effects model was used for statistical analysis. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale was used for quality assessment. Fourteen studies were included in this review, and 12 met inclusion criteria for meta-analysis, representing 4793 Indigenous and 83,592 non-Indigenous patients. Indigenous pediatric patients had a greater than twofold overall (OR 2.0.6, 95% CI 1.23-3.46) and 30-day postoperative mortality (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.23-4.05) than non-Indigenous populations. Surgical site infections (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.73-1.50), reoperations (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.51-1.11), and length of hospital stay (SMD = 0.55, 95% CI - 0.55-1.65) were similar between the two groups. There was a non-significant increase in hospital readmissions (OR 6.09, 95% CI 0.32-116.41, p = 0.23) and overall morbidity (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.91-1.40) for Indigenous children. Indigenous children worldwide experience increased postoperative mortality. It is necessary to collaborate with Indigenous communities to promote solutions for more equitable and culturally appropriate pediatric surgical care.

Trauma Training Courses and Programs in Low- and Lower Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Injury is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in low- and lower middle-income countries (LMICs). Trauma training is a cost-effective way to improve injury outcomes. Several trauma programs have been implemented in LMICs; however, their scope and effectiveness remain unclear. In this review, we sought to describe and assess the current state of trauma training in LMICs. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, Cochrane Library, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global for trauma training courses in LMICs. An additional gray literature search was conducted on university, governmental, and non- governmental organizations' websites to identify trauma-related postgraduate medical education (PGME) opportunities. RESULTS: Most studies occurred in sub-Saharan Africa and participants were primarily physicians/surgeons, medical students/residents, and nurses. General and surgical trauma management courses were most common, followed by orthopedic trauma or plastic surgery trauma/burn care courses. 32/45 studies reported on participant knowledge and skills, 27 of which had minimal follow-up. Of the four studies commenting on cost of courses, only one demonstrated cost-effectiveness. Three articles evaluated post-course effects on patient outcomes, two of which failed to demonstrate significant improvements. Overall, 43.0% of LMICs have PGME programs with defined trauma competency requirements. CONCLUSIONS: Current studies on trauma training in LMICs do not clearly demonstrate sustainability, cost-effectiveness, nor improved outcomes. Trauma training programs should be in response to a need, championed locally, and work within a cohesive system to demonstrate concrete benefits. We recommend standardized and contextualized trauma training with recertifications in LMICs for lasting and improved trauma care.

Needs assessment for the creation of a community of practice in a community health navigator cohort.

BACKGROUND: Community Health Navigators (CHNs) are members of a patient's care team that aim to reduce barriers in accessing healthcare. CHNs have been described in various healthcare settings, including chronic disease management. The ENhancing COMmunity health through Patient navigation, Advocacy, and Social Support (ENCOMPASS) program of research employs CHNs, who are trained to improve access to care and community resources for patients with multiple chronic diseases. With complex and demanding roles, it is essential that CHNs communicate with each other to maintain knowledge exchange and best practices. A Community of Practice (CoP) is a model of situated learning that promotes communication, dedication, and collaboration that can facilitate this communication. The objective of this study was to engage with CHNs to determine how a CoP could be implemented to promote consistency in practices and knowledge for CHNs across primary care sites. METHODS: A needs assessment for a CHN CoP was conducted using sequential steps of inquiry. A preliminary focused literature review (FLR) was done to examine the ways in which other healthcare CoPs have been implemented. Results from the FLR guided the creation of an exploratory survey and group interview with key informants to understand best approaches for CoP creation. Political, economic, social, and technological (PEST) and strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analyses synthesized results in a comprehensive manner for strategic recommendations. RESULTS: The FLR identified different approaches and components of healthcare CoPs and guided analyses of mitigatable risk factors and leverageable assets for the intervention. The survey and group interview revealed an informal and effective CoP amongst current CHNs, with preferred methods including coffee meetings, group trainings, and seminars. A well-maintained web platform with features such as an encrypted discussion forum, community resource listing, calendar of events, and semi-annual CHN conferences were suggested methods for creating an inter-regional, formal CoP. CONCLUSION: The study findings recognise the presence of an informal CoP within the studied CHN cohort. Implementation of a formal CoP should complement current CoP approaches and aid in facilitating expansion to other primary care centres utilizing digital communication methods, such as a comprehensive web platform and online forum.

Public health measures to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in Canada during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: The main objectives of this study were to synthesise and compare pandemic preparedness strategies issued by the federal and provincial/territorial (P/T) governments in Canada and to assess whether COVID-19 public health (PH) measures were tailored towards priority populations, as defined by relevant social determinants of health. METHODS: This scoping review searched federal and P/T websites on daily COVID-19 pandemic preparedness strategies between 30 January and 30 April 2020. The PROGRESS-Plus equity-lens framework was used to define priority populations. All definitions, policies and guidelines of PH strategies implemented by the federal and P/T governments to reduce risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission were included. PH measures were classified using a modified Public Health Agency of Canada Framework for Canadian Pandemic Influenza Preparedness. RESULTS: A total of 722 COVID-19 PH measures were issued during the study period. Of these, home quarantine (voluntary) (n=13.0%; 94/722) and retail/commerce restrictions (10.9%; n=79/722) were the most common measures introduced. Many of the PH orders, including physical distancing, cancellation of mass gatherings, school closures or retail/commerce restrictions began to be introduced after 11 March 2020. Lifting of some of the PH orders in phases to reopen the economy began in April 2020 (6.5%; n=47/722). The majority (68%, n=491/722) of COVID-19 PH announcements were deemed mandatory, while 32% (n=231/722) were recommendations. Several PH measures (28.0%, n=202/722) targeted a variety of groups at risk of socially produced health inequalities, such as age, religion, occupation and migration status. CONCLUSIONS: Most PH measures centred on limiting contact between people who were not from the same household. PH measures were evolutionary in nature, reflecting new evidence that emerged throughout the pandemic. Although ~30% of all implemented COVID-19 PH measures were tailored towards priority groups, there were still unintended consequences on these populations.

Risk Stratification of Prostate Cancer Through Quantitative Assessment of PTEN Loss (qPTEN).

BACKGROUND: Phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) loss has long been associated with adverse findings in early prostate cancer. Studies to date have yet to employ quantitative methods (qPTEN) for measuring of prognostically relevant amounts of PTEN loss in postsurgical settings and demonstrate its clinical application. METHODS: PTEN protein levels were measured by immunohistochemistry in radical prostatectomy samples from training (n = 410) and validation (n = 272) cohorts. PTEN loss was quantified per cancer cell and per tissue microarray core. Thresholds for identifying clinically relevant PTEN loss were determined using log-rank statistics in the training cohort. Univariate (Kaplan-Meier) and multivariate (Cox proportional hazards) analyses on various subpopulations were performed to assess biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) and were independently validated. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: PTEN loss in more than 65% cancer cells was most clinically relevant and had statistically significant association with reduced BRFS in training (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.59 to 3.87; P < .001) and validation cohorts (HR = 4.22, 95% CI = 2.01 to 8.83; P < .001). The qPTEN scoring method identified patients who recurred within 5.4 years after surgery (P < .001). In men with favorable risk of biochemical recurrence (Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment - Postsurgical scores <5 and no adverse pathological features), qPTEN identified a subset of patients with shorter BRFS (HR = 5.52, 95% CI = 2.36 to 12.90; P < .001) who may be considered for intensified monitoring and/or adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with previous qualitative approaches, qPTEN improves risk stratification of postradical prostatectomy patients and may be considered as a complementary tool to guide disease management after surgery.