This is the largest intercontinental study on healthcare provider-identified barriers to care, representing the limitations experienced by healthcare professionals in providing corrective surgery for CLP around the world. Financial risk protection from hidden costs, such as patient travel costs, is essential. Community health workers and nurses are critical for communication and linking CLP care to the rest of the community. Recognition of these barriers can inform future policy decisions, targeted by region, for surgical systems delivering care for patients with CLP worldwide.

Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index <20), moderate lockdowns (20–60), and full lockdowns (>60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04384926 . Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include...

Objective: To better understand the capacity for orthodontic care, service features, and finances among members of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association (ACPA). Design: Cross-sectional survey. Setting: ACPA-approved multidisciplinary cleft teams. Participants: Cleft team coordinators. Interventions: Coordinators were asked to complete the survey working together with their orthodontists. Main Outcome Measure: Model for orthodontic care. Results: Coordinators from 82 out of 167 teams certified by ACPA completed the survey (response rate = 49.1%). Most orthodontists were private practice volunteers (48%) followed by university/hospital employed (22.8%). Care was often delivered in community private practice facilities (44.2%) or combination of university and private practice facilities (39.0%). Half of teams reported offering presurgical infant orthopedics (PSIO), with nasoalveolar molding being the most common. Cleft/craniofacial patients typically comprise 25% or less of the orthodontists’ practices. The presence of a university/hospital-based orthodontist was associated with higher rates of offering PSIO ( P < .001) and an increased percentage dedication of their practice to cleft/craniofacial care ( P < .001). Conclusion: Orthodontic models across ACPA-certified teams are highly varied. The employment of full-time craniofacial orthodontists is less common but is highly correlated with a practice with a high percentage of cleft care and the offering of advanced services such as PSIO. Future work should focus on how to effectively promote such roles for orthodontists to ensure high-level care for cleft/craniofacial patients requiring treatment from infancy through skeletal maturity.

BackgroundBrazil boasts a health scheme that aspires to provide universal coverage, but its surgical system has rarely been analysed. In an effort to strengthen surgical systems worldwide, the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery proposed a collection of 6 standardised indicators: 2-hour access to surgery, surgical workforce density, surgical volume, perioperative mortality rate (POMR) and protection against impoverishing and catastrophic expenditure. This study aims to characterise the Brazilian surgical health system with these newly devised indicators while gaining understanding on the complexity of the indicators themselves.MethodsUsing Brazil's national healthcare database, commonly reported healthcare variables were used to calculate or simulate the 6 surgical indicators. Access to surgery was calculated using hospital locations, surgical workforce density was calculated using locations of surgeons, anaesthesiologists and obstetricians (SAO), and surgical volume and POMR were identified with surgical procedure codes. The rates of protection against impoverishing and catastrophic expenditure were modelled using cost of surgical inpatient hospitalisations and a γ distribution of incomes based on Gini and gross domestic product/capita.FindingsIn 2014, SAO density was 34.7/100 000 population, surgical volume was 4433 procedures/100 000 people and POMR was 1.71%. 79.4% of surgical patients were protected against impoverishing expenditure and 84.6% were protected against catastrophic expenditure due to surgery each year. 2-hour access to surgery was not able to be calculated from national health data, but a proxy measure suggested that 97.2% of the population has 2-hour access to a hospital that may be able to provide surgery. Geographic disparities were seen in all indicators.InterpretationBrazil's public surgical system meets several key benchmarks. Geographic disparities, however, are substantial and raise concerns of equity. Policies should focus on stimulating appropriate geographic allocation of the surgical workforce and better distribution of surgical volume. In some cases, where benchmarks for each indicator are met, supplemental analysis can further inform our understanding of health systems. This measured and systematic evaluation should be encouraged for all nations seeking to better understand their surgical systems.

No abstract

Objective To examine the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of a group-based yoga therapy intervention for middle-aged and older women with urinary incontinence. Methods We conducted a pilot randomized trial of ambulatory women aged 40 years and older with stress, urgency, or mixed-type incontinence. Women were randomized to a 6-week yoga therapy program (N=10) consisting of twice weekly group classes and once weekly home practice or a waitlist control group (N=9). All participants also received written pamphlets about standard behavioral self-management strategies for incontinence. Changes in incontinence were assessed by 7-day voiding diaries. Results Mean (±SD) age was 61.4 (±8.2) years, and mean baseline frequency of incontinence was 2.5 (±1.3) episodes/day. After 6 weeks, total incontinence frequency decreased by 66% (1.8 [±0.9] fewer episodes/day) in the yoga therapy versus 13% (0.3 [±1.7] fewer episodes/day) in the control group (P=0.049). Participants in the yoga therapy group also reported an average 85% decrease in stress incontinence frequency (0.7 [±0.8] fewer episodes/day) compared to a 25% increase in controls (0.2 [± 1.1] more episodes/day) (P=0.039). No significant differences in reduction in urgency incontinence were detected between the yoga therapy versus control groups (1.0 [±1.0] versus 0.5 [±0.5] fewer episodes/day, P=0.20). All women starting the yoga therapy program completed at least 90% of group classes and practice sessions. Two participants in each group reported adverse events unrelated to the intervention. Conclusions Findings provide preliminary evidence to support the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of a group-based yoga therapy intervention to improve urinary incontinence in women.

BACKGROUND:The aims of this study were to provide data on the safety of head and neck cancer surgery currently being undertaken during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: This international, observational cohort study comprised 1137 consecutive patients with head and neck cancer undergoing primary surgery with curative intent in 26 countries. Factors associated with severe pulmonary complications in COVID-19-positive patients and infections in the surgical team were determined by univariate analysis. RESULTS: Among the 1137 patients, the commonest sites were the oral cavity (38%) and the thyroid (21%). For oropharynx and larynx tumors, nonsurgical therapy was favored in most cases. There was evidence of surgical de-escalation of neck management and reconstruction. Overall 30-day mortality was 1.2%. Twenty-nine patients (3%) tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) within 30 days of surgery; 13 of these patients (44.8%) developed severe respiratory complications, and 3.51 (10.3%) died. There were significant correlations with an advanced tumor stage and admission to critical care. Members of the surgical team tested positive within 30 days of surgery in 40 cases (3%). There were significant associations with operations in which the patients also tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 within 30 days, with a high community incidence of SARS-CoV-2, with screened patients, with oral tumor sites, and with tracheostomy. CONCLUSIONS: Head and neck cancer surgery in the COVID-19 era appears safe even when surgery is prolonged and complex. The overlap in COVID-19 between patients and members of the surgical team raises the suspicion of failures in cross-infection measures or the use of personal protective equipment. Cancer 2020;0:1-13.

Timely, affordable access to screened blood is essential to the provision of safe surgical care and depends on three key aspects: adequate volume of blood supply, safe protocols for blood donation and transfusion, and appropriate regulation to ensure safe, equitable and sustainable distribution. Many low-income and middle-income countries experience a deficit in these categories, particularly in rural areas. We draw on the experience of rural surgical practitioners in India and summarise the existing literature to evaluate India’s blood banking system and discuss its major barriers to the safe and equitable provision of blood. Many low-income and middle-income countries struggle with accruing a sufficient voluntary, unpaid blood donation base to meet the need. Efforts to increase blood supply through mandatory family replacement donations can lead to dangerous delays in care provision. Additionally, prohibition of unbanked, directed blood transfusion restricts the options of health practitioners, particularly in rural areas. Blood safety is also a significant concern, and efforts must be taken to decrease the risk of transfusion-transmitted infections and inform and treat donors who test positive. Lastly, blood banking systems need a centralised governing body to ensure fair prices for blood, promote comprehensive transfusion reporting and increase system-wide transparency and accountability.