No abstract

Background Effective humanitarian surgeons require skills in general surgery, OB/GYN, orthopedics, and urology. With increasing specialization, it is unclear whether US general surgery residents are receiving exposure to these disparate fields. We sought to assess the preparedness of graduating American surgical residents for humanitarian deployment. Methods We retrospectively analyzed cases performed by American College of Graduate Medical Education general surgery graduates from 2009 to 2015 and cases performed at select Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) facilities from 2008 to 2012. Cases were categorized by specialty (general surgery, orthopedics, OB/GYN, urology) and compared with Chi-squared testing. Non-operative care including basic wound and drain care was excluded from both data sets. Results US general surgery residents performed 41.3% MSF relevant general surgery cases, 1.9% orthopedic cases, 0.1% OB/GYN cases, and 0.3% urology cases; the remaining 56.4% of cases exceeded the standard MSF scope of care. In comparison, MSF cases were 30.1% general surgery, 21.2% orthopedics, 46.8% OB/GYN, and 1.9% urology. US residents performed fewer OB/GYN cases (p \ 0.01) and fewer orthopedic cases (p \ 0.01). Differences in general surgery and urology caseloads were not statistically significant. Key procedures in which residents lacked experience included cesarean sections, hysterectomies, and external bony fixation. Conclusion Current US surgical training is poorly aligned with typical MSF surgical caseloads, particularly in OB/ GYN and orthopedics. New mechanisms for obtaining relevant surgical skills should be developed to better prepare American surgical trainees interested in humanitarian work.

CitationOperative trauma in low-resource settings: Background. Conflicts and disasters remain prevalent in low-and middle-income countries, and injury remains a leading cause of death worldwide. The objective of this study was to describe the operative procedures performed for injury-related pathologies at facilities supported by M edecins Sans Fronti eres (MSF) to guide the planning of future responses. Methods. A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of all MSF procedures performed between July 2008 and June 2014 for injury-related indications was completed. Individual data points included country of project and date of procedure; age, patient sex, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists' score of each patient; indication for surgery, including mechanism of injury; operative procedure; operative urgency; operative order; type of anesthesia; and intraoperative mortality. Injury severity was stratified according to operative order and urgency. Results. A total of 79,715 procedures were performed in MSF projects that met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 35,756 (44.9%) were performed specifically for traumatic indications across 17 countries. Even after excluding trauma centers, 29.4% (18,329/62,288) of operative cases were for injuries. Operative trauma procedures were performed most commonly for road traffic injuries (29.9%; 10,686/35,756). The most common procedure for acute trauma was extensive wound debridement (31.6%; 3,165/ 10,022) whereas burn dressings were the most frequent planned reoperation (27.1%; 4,361/16,078). Conclusion. Trauma remains an important component of the operative care provided in humanitarian assistance. This review of procedures performed by MSF in a variety of settings provides valuable insight into demographics of trauma patients, mechanisms of injury, and surgical capabilities required in planning resource allocation for future humanitarian missions in low-and middle-income countries. (Surgery 2015;157:850-6.)

BackgroundMédecins Sans Frontières (MSF) has been providing healthcare in Afghanistan since 1981 including specialized health services for trauma patients in Kunduz Trauma Center (KTC) from 2011. On October 3rd, 2015, a US airstrike hit the KTC, killing 42 people including 14 MSF staff. This study aims to demonstrate the impact on healthcare provision, after hospital destruction, by assessing the extent of care provided for trauma and injuries by the MSF KTC and to report on treatment outcomes from January 2014 to June 2015, three months prior to the bombing.MethodsThis is a descriptive, retrospective review of hospital records. All patients with traumatic injuries registered in the Emergency Department (ED) or hospitalized in In-Patients Department (IPD) and/or Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of KTC between January 2014 and June 2015 were included in the study.ResultsA total of 35647 patients were registered in KTC during the study period. 3199 patients registered in the ED were children aged <5 years and 310 of them were admitted including 47 to the ICU. 77.5% patients were from Kunduz province and the remaining were from other provinces. The average length of stay was 7.3 days and 3.3 days while the bed occupancy rate was an average 91.1% and 75.8% in IPD and ICU, respectively. Of 4605 IPD patients, 105 (2.3%) developed complications. Among those admitted to the ICU, 12.6% patients died. About one-third surgical interventions were carried out on an urgent basis and the major proportion (45.8%) of surgical procedures was wound surgery followed by orthopedic surgery (27.0%).ConclusionsThis study highlights the high burden of traumatic injuries in Kunduz province and MSF Trauma Center’s contribution to saving lives, preventing disabilities and alleviating suffering among adults and children within the region. The bombing and destruction of KTC has resulted in a specific gap in critical healthcare services for the local communities in the health system of this war-ravaged region. This suggests the urgent need for reconstruction and re-opening of the center.

Purpose Médecins sans Frontières (MSF) is one of the main providers of orthopaedic surgery in natural disaster and conflict settings and strictly imposes a minimum set of contextspecific standards before any surgery can be performed. Based on MSF's experience of performing orthopaedic surgery in a number of such settings, we describe: (a) whether it was possible to implement the minimum standards for one of the more rigorous orthopaedic procedures-internal fixation-and when possible, the time frame, (b) the volume and type of interventions performed and (c) the intra-operative mortality rates and postoperative infection rates. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of routine programme data collected between 2007 and 2014 from three MSF emergency surgical interventions in Haiti (following the 2010 earthquake) and three ongoing MSF projects in Kunduz (Afghanistan), Masisi (Democratic Republic of the Congo) and Tabarre (Haiti). ResultsThe minimum standards for internal fixation were achieved in one emergency intervention site in Haiti, and in Kunduz and Tabarre, taking up to 18 months to implement in Kunduz. All sites achieved the minimum standards to perform amputations, reductions and external fixations, with a total of 9,409 orthopaedic procedures performed during the study period. Intraoperative mortality rates ranged from 0.6 to 1.9 % and postoperative infection rates from 2.4 to 3.5 %. Conclusions In settings affected by natural disaster or conflict, a high volume and wide repertoire of orthopaedic surgical procedures can be performed with good outcomes when minimum standards are in place. More demanding procedures like internal fixation may not always be feasible.