Over the last decade, a massive increase in data collection and analysis has occurred in many fields. In the health sector, however, there has been relatively little progress in data analysis and application despite a rapid rise in data production. Given adequate governance, improvements in the quality, quantity, storage and analysis of health data could lead to substantial improvements in many health outcomes. In low- and middle-income countries in particular, the creation of an information feedback mechanism can move health-care delivery towards results-based practice and improve the effective use of scarce resources. We review the evolving definition of big data and the possible advantages of – and problems in – using such data to improve health-care delivery in low- and middle-income countries. The collection of big data as mobile-phone based services improve may mean that development phases required elsewhere can be skipped. However, poor infrastructure may prevent interoperability and the safe use of patient data. An appropriate governance framework must be developed and enforced to protect individuals and ensure that health-care delivery is tailored to the characteristics and values of the target communities.
In 2015, the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery (LCoGS) recommended six surgical metrics to enable countries to measure their surgical and anaesthesia care delivery. These indicators have subsequently been accepted by the World Bank for inclusion in the World Development Indicators. With support from the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons and the Pacific Islands Surgical Association, 14 South Pacific countries collaborated to collect the first four of six LCoGS indicators. Thirteen countries collected all four indicators over a 6-month period from October 2015 to April 2016. Australia and New Zealand exceeded the recommended LCoGS target for all four indicators. Only 5 of 13 countries (38%) achieved 2-hour access for at least 80% of their population, with a range of 20% (Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands) to over 65% (Fiji and Samoa). Five of 13 (38%) countries met the target surgical volume of 5000 procedures per 100 000 population, with six performing less than 1600. Four of 14 (29%) countries had at least 20 surgical, anaesthesia and obstetric providers in their workforce per 100 000 population, with a range of 0.9 (Timor Leste) to 18.5 (Tuvalu). Perioperative mortality rate was reported by 13 of 14 countries, and ranged from 0.11% to 1.0%. We believe it is feasible to collect global surgery indicators across the South Pacific, a diverse geographical region encompassing high-income and low-income countries. Such metrics will allow direct comparison between similar nations, but more importantly provide baseline data that providers and politicians can use in advocacy national health planning.
The WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist (SCC) was developed to ensure the delivery of essential maternal and perinatal care practices around the time of childbirth. A research collaboration was subsequently established to explore factors that influence use of the Checklist in a range of settings around the world. This analysis article presents an overview of the WHO SCC Collaboration and the lessons garnered from implementing the Checklist across a diverse range of settings. Project leads from each collaboration site were asked to distribute two surveys. The first was given to end users, and the second to implementation teams to describe their respective experiences using the Checklist. A total of 134 end users and 38 implementation teams responded to the surveys, from 19 countries across all levels of income. End users were willing to adopt the SCC and found it easy to use. Training and the provision of supervision while using the Checklist, alongside leadership engagement and local ownership, were important factors which helped facilitate initial implementation and successful uptake of the Checklist. Teams identified several challenges, but more importantly successfully implemented the WHO SCC. A critical step in all settings was the adaptation of the Checklist to reflect local context and national protocols and standards. These findings were invaluable in developing the final version of the WHO SCC and its associated implementation guide. Our experience will provide useful insights for any institution wishing to implement the Checklist.
Objective: To explore medical students’ views on support services, stigma, and teaching of wellbeing in light of their experiences of stress and distress.
Design, participants and setting: Quantitative survey of medical students at five universities in Australia and New Zealand in November 2007.
Main outcome measures: Medical students’ experiences of support services, stigma attached to undergoing stress and distress, and teaching of wellbeing.
Results: 1328 students completed the survey (26% response rate). Seventy‐one per cent of students were aware of support services at their university. Of these, 46% believed the services were adequately promoted, and 49% had either used the services themselves or knew someone who had. Overall, 70% of students had their own general practitioner, but this fell to 45% for international students (P < 0.001). Fifty‐five per cent of students believed there was a stigma associated with being a medical student undergoing stress and distress. Fifty‐six per cent of students believed they had formal teaching on stress and distress. Students most wanted to learn methods to help somebody else cope and preferred to be taught through formal lectures.
Conclusion: Medical curricula on wellbeing should include strategies for self‐help and giving assistance to others, and aim to decrease stigma. Adequate and well‐promoted support services are required to complement this teaching, in particular for international students.
Documenting locally identified challenges and opportunities for surgical care in Vanuatu is an important first step towards developing formal strategies for improving surgical services at the country level.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.