The Millennium Development Goals have ended and the Sustainable Development Goals have begun, marking a shift in the global health landscape. The frame of reference has changed from a focus on 8 development priorities to an expansive set of 17 interrelated goals intended to improve the well-being of all people. In this time of change, several groups, including the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery, have brought a critical problem to the fore: 5 billion people lack access to safe, affordable surgical and anaesthesia care when needed. The magnitude of this problem and the world's new focus on strengthening health systems mandate reimagined roles for and renewed commitments from high income country actors in global surgery. To discuss the way forward, on 6 May 2015, the Commission held its North American launch event in Boston, Massachusetts. Panels of experts outlined the current state of knowledge and agreed on the roles of surgical colleges and academic medical centres; trainees and training programmes; academia; global health funders; the biomedical devices industry, and news media and advocacy organisations in building sustainable, resilient surgical systems. This paper summarises these discussions and serves as a consensus statement providing practical advice to these groups. It traces a common policy agenda between major actors and provides a roadmap for maximising benefit to surgical patients worldwide. To close the access gap by 2030, individuals and organisations must work collectively, interprofessionally and globally. High income country actors must abandon colonial narratives and work alongside low and middle income country partners to build the surgical systems of the future.

Background and objectivesIt is Ugandan governmental policy that all surgical care delivered at government hospitals in Uganda is to be provided to patients free of charge. In practice, however, frequent stock-outs and broken equipment require patients to pay for large portions of their care out of their own pocket. The purpose of this study was to determine the financial impact on patients who undergo surgery at a government hospital in Uganda.MethodsEvery surgical patient discharged from a surgical ward at a large regional referral hospital in rural southwestern Uganda over a 3-week period in April 2016 was asked to participate. Patients who agreed were surveyed to determine their baseline level of poverty and to assess the financial impact of the hospitalization. Rates of impoverishment and catastrophic expenditure were then calculated. An “impoverishing expense” is defined as one that pushes a household below published poverty thresholds. A “catastrophic expense” was incurred if the patient spent more than 10% of their average annual expenditures.ResultsWe interviewed 295 out of a possible 320 patients during the study period. 46% (CI 40–52%) of our patients met the World Bank’s definition of extreme poverty ($1.90/person/day). After receiving surgical care an additional 10 patients faced extreme poverty, and 5 patients were newly impoverished by the World Bank’s definition ($3.10/person/day). 31% of patients faced a catastrophic expenditure of more than 10% of their estimated total yearly expenses. 53% of the households in our study had to borrow money to pay for care, 21% had to sell possessions, and 17% lost a job as a result of the patient’s hospitalization. Only 5% of our patients received some form of charity.Conclusions and relevanceDespite the government’s policy to provide “free care,” undergoing an operation at a government hospital in Uganda can result in a severe economic burden to patients and their families. Alternative financing schemes to provide financial protection are critically needed.

BackgroundFive billion people lack access to safe, affordable, and timely surgical and anesthesia care. Significant challenges remain in the provision of surgical care in low-resource settings. Uganda is no exception.MethodsFrom September to November 2016, we conducted a mixed-methods countrywide surgical capacity assessment at 17 randomly selected public hospitals in Uganda. Researchers conducted 35 semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders to understand factors related to the provision of surgical care. The framework approach was used for thematic and explanatory data analysis.ResultsThe Ugandan public health care sector continues to face significant challenges in the provision of safe, timely, and affordable surgical care. These challenges can be broadly grouped into preparedness and policy, service delivery, and the financial burden of surgical care. Hospital staff reported challenges including: (1) significant delays in accessing surgical care, compounded by a malfunctioning referral system; (2) critical workforce shortages; (3) operative capacity that is limited by inadequate infrastructure and overwhelmed by emergency and obstetric volume; (4) supply chain difficulties pertaining to provision of essential medications, equipment, supplies, and blood; (5) significant, variable, and sometimes catastrophic expenditures for surgical patients and their families; and (6) a lack of surgery-specific policies and priorities. Despite these challenges, innovative strategies are being used in the public to provide surgical care to those most in need.ConclusionBarriers to the provision of surgical care are cross-cutting and involve constraints in infrastructure, service delivery, workforce, and financing. Understanding current strengths and shortfalls of Uganda’s surgical system is a critical first step in developing effective, targeted policy and programming that will build and strengthen its surgical capacity.

BACKGROUND:While much of trauma care is rightly focused on improving inpatient survival, the ultimate goal of recovery is to help patients return to their daily lives after injury. Although the overwhelming majority of trauma patients in the United States survive to hospital discharge, little is known nationally regarding the postdischarge economic burden of injuries among trauma survivors. METHODS:We used the National Health Interview Survey from 2008 to 2017 to identify working-age trauma patients, aged 18 to 64 years, who sustained injuries requiring hospitalization. We used propensity score matching to identify noninjured respondents. Our primary outcome measure was postinjury return to work among trauma patients. Our secondary outcomes included measures of food insecurity, medical debt, accessibility and affordability of health care, and disability. RESULTS:A nationally weighted sample of 319,580 working-age trauma patients were identified. Of these patients, 51.7% were employed at the time of injury, and 58.9% of them had returned to work at the time of interview, at a median of 47 days postdischarge. Higher rates of returning to work were associated with shorter length of hospital stay, higher education level, and private health insurance. Injury was associated with food insecurity at an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.8 (95% confidence interval, 1.40-2.37), with difficulty affording health care at aOR of 1.6 (1.00-2.47), with medical debt at aOR of 2.6 (2.11-3.20), and with foregoing care due to cost at aOR of 2.0 (1.52-2.63). Working-age trauma patients had disability at an aOR of 17.6 (12.93-24.05). CONCLUSION:The postdischarge burden of injury among working-age US trauma survivors is profound-patients report significant limitations in employment, financial security, disability, and functional independence. A better understanding of the long-term impact of injury is necessary to design the interventions needed to optimize postinjury recovery so that trauma survivors can lead productive and fulfilling lives after injury.

No abstract

The Ugandan public hospital system does not meet LCoGS targets for surgical access, workforce, or surgical volume. Critical policy and programmatic developments are essential to build surgical capacity and facilitate provision of safe, timely, and affordable surgical care. Surgery must become a public health priority in Uganda and other low resource settings.

No abstract

No abstract