RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Taliban takeover in August 2021 ended a decades-long conflict in Afghanistan. Yet, along with improved security, there have been collateral changes, such as the exacerbation of the economic crisis and brain drain. Although these changes have altered the lives of Afghans in many ways, it is unclear whether they have affected access to care. This study aimed to analyse Afghans' access to care and how this access has changed after August 2021. METHODS: The study relied on the collaboration with the non-governmental organisation EMERGENCY, running a network of three hospitals and 41 First Aid Posts in 10 Afghan provinces. A 67-item questionnaire about access to care changes after August 2021 was developed and disseminated at EMERGENCY facilities. Ordinal logistic regression was used to evaluate whether access to care changes were associated with participants' characteristics. RESULTS: In total, 1807 valid responses were returned. Most respondents (54.34%) reported improved security when visiting healthcare facilities, while the ability to reach facilities has remained stable for the majority of them (50.28%). Care is less affordable for the majority of respondents (45.82%). Female respondents, those who are unmarried and not engaged, and patients in the Panjshir province were less likely to perceive improvements in access to care. CONCLUSIONS: Findings outline which dimensions of access to care need resource allocation. The inability to pay for care is the most relevant barrier to access care after August 2021 and must therefore be prioritised. Women and people from the Panjshir province may require ad hoc interventions to improve their access to care.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Following the change of government in August 2021, the social and economic landscape of Afghanistan deteriorated into an economic and humanitarian crisis. Afghans continue to struggle to access basic healthcare services, making Universal Health Coverage (UHC) in the country a major challenge. The aim of this study was to perform a qualitative investigation into the main access to care challenges in Afghanistan and whether these challenges have been influenced by the recent socio-political developments, by examining the perspectives of health professionals and hospital directors working in the country. METHODS: Health professionals working in facilities run by an international non-government organisation, which has maintained continuous operations since 1999 and has become a key health reference point for the population, alongside the public health system, and hospital directors working in government hospitals were recruited to participate in an in-depth qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: A total of 43 participants from ten provinces were interviewed in this study. Four issues were identified as critical barriers to achieving UHC in Afghanistan: (1) the lack of quality human resources; (2) the suboptimal management of chronic diseases and trauma; (3) the inaccessibility of necessary health services due to financial hardship; (4) the unequal accessibility of care for different demographic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals and hospital directors shed light on weaknesses in the Afghan health system highlighting chronic issues and issues that have deteriorated as a result of the 2021 socio-political changes. In order to improve access to care, future healthcare system reforms should consider the perspectives of Afghan professionals working in the country, who are in close contact with Afghan patients and communities.
RESUMO
Background: Management of penetrating abdominal war injuries centers upon triage, echeloned care, and damage control. A civilian hospital based in a war zone can rarely rely upon these principles because it normally has limited resources and lacks rapid medical evacuation. We designed this study to describe organ injury patterns and factors related to mortality in patients with penetrating abdominal war injuries in a civilian hospital in an active war zone in Afghanistan, examine how these findings differ from those in a typical military setting, and evaluate how they might improve patients' care. Methods: We reviewed the records of all patients admitted at the Lashkargah "Emergency" hospital with penetrating abdominal injuries treated from January 2006 to December 2016. Demographic and clinical data were recorded; univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify variables significantly associated with death. Results: We treated 953 patients for penetrating abdominal injury. The population was mainly civilian (12.1% women and 21% under 14). Mean age was 23 years, and patients with blast injuries were younger than in the other groups. The mechanism of injury was bullet injury in 589 patients, shell injury in 246, stab wound in 97, and mine injury in 21. The most frequent abdominal lesion was small bowel injury (46.3%). Small and large bowel injuries were the most frequent in the blast groups, stomach injury in stab wounds. Overall mortality was 12.8%. Variables significantly associated with death were age > 34 years, mine and bullet injury, length of stay, time since injury > 5 h, injury severity score > 17, and associated injuries. Conclusions: Epidemiology and patterns of injury in a civilian hospital differ from those reported in a typical military setting. Our population is mainly civilian with a significant number of women and patients under 14 years. BI are more frequent than blast injuries, and gastrointestinal injuries are more common than injuries to solid organs. In this austere setting, surgeons need to acquire a wide range of skills from multiple surgical specialties. These findings might guide trauma and general surgeons treating penetrating abdominal war wounds to achieve better care and outcome.
