Therapeutic study, level II.

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.

BackgroundIn low-resource settings, access to emergency cesarean section is associated with various delays leading to poor neonatal outcomes. In this study, we described the delays a mother faces when needing emergency cesarean delivery and assessed the effect of these delays on neonatal outcomes in Rwanda.MethodsThis retrospective study included 441 neonates and their mothers who underwent emergency cesarean section in 2015 at three district hospitals in Rwanda. Four delays were measured: duration of labor prior to hospital admission, travel time from health center to district hospital, time from admission to surgical incision, and time from decision for emergency cesarean section to surgical incision. Neonatal outcomes were categorized as unfavorable (APGAR <7 at 5 min or death) and favorable (alive and APGAR ≥7 at 5 min). We assessed the relationship between each type of delay and neonatal outcomes using multivariate logistic regression.ResultsIn our study, 9.1% (40 out of 401) of neonates had an unfavorable outcome, 38.7% (108 out of 279) of neonates’ mothers labored for 12–24 h before hospital admission, and 44.7% (159 of 356) of mothers were transferred from health centers that required 30–60 min of travel time to reach the district hospital. Furthermore, 48.1% (178 of 370) of cesarean sections started within 5 h after hospital admission and 85.2% (288 of 338) started more than 30 min after the decision for cesarean section was made. Neonatal outcomes were significantly worse among mothers with more than 90 min of travel time from the health center to the district hospital compared to mothers referred from health centers located on the same compound as the hospital (aOR = 5.12, p = 0.02). Neonates with cesarean deliveries starting more than 30 min after decision for cesarean section had better outcomes than those starting immediately (aOR = 0.32, p = 0.04).ConclusionsLonger travel time between health center and district hospital was associated with poor neonatal outcomes, highlighting a need to decrease barriers to accessing emergency maternal services. However, longer decision to incision interval posed less risk for adverse neonatal outcome. While this could indicate thorough pre-operative interventions including triage and resuscitation, this relationship should be studied prospectively in the future.

Access to surgical care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) remains deficient without an adequate workforce. There is limited understanding of the gender gap in surgical trainees in LMICs. In Rwanda, females fill only one of 20 positions available. Understanding surgeons’ experiences and perceptions of surgical careers may help facilitate support for females to contribute to the global surgical workforce. We performed qualitative analysis on perceptions of surgical careers through semi-structured interviews of all female surgeons (n = 6) and corresponding male surgeons (n = 6) who are training or have trained at University of Rwanda. Transcripts were analyzed with code structure formed through an integrated approach. Question categories formed the deductive framework, while theoretical saturation was reached through inductive grounded theory. Themes were organized within two key points of the career timeline. First, for developing interest in surgery, three main themes were identified: role models, patient case encounters, and exposure to surgery. Second, for selecting and sustaining surgical careers, four main themes emerged: social expectations about roles within the family, physical and mental challenges, professional and personal support, and finances. All female surgeons emphasized gender assumptions and surgical working culture as obstacles, with a corresponding strong sense of self-confidence and internal motivation that drew them to select and maintain careers in surgery. Family, time, and physical endurance were cited as persistent challenges for female participants. Our study reveals concepts for further exploration about gendered perceptions of surgical careers. Efforts to improve support for female surgical careers as a strategy for shaping surgical work culture and professional development in Rwanda should be considered. Such strategies may be beneficial for improving the global surgical workforce.

No abstract

No abstract

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.