Increasing access to pediatric surgical care: Assessing district hospital readiness in rural Rwanda.

Introduction/Background: Safe and quality surgery is crucial for child health. In Rwanda, district hospitals serve as primary entry points for pediatric patients needing surgical care. This paper reports on the organizational readiness and facility capacity to provide pediatric surgery in three district hospitals in rural Rwanda. Methods: We administered the Children's Surgical Assessment Tool (CSAT), adapted for a Rwandan district hospital, to assess facility readiness across 5 domains (infrastructure, workforce, service delivery, financing, and training) at three Partners in Health supported district hospitals (Kirehe, Rwinkwavu, and Butaro District Hospitals). We used the Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool (SSORT) to measure perceived individual and team readiness to implement surgical quality improvement interventions across 14 domains. Results: None of the facilities had a dedicated pediatric surgeon, and the most common barriers to pediatric surgery were lack of surgeon (68%), lack of physician anesthesiologists (19%), and inadequate infrastructure (17%). There were gaps in operating and recovery room infrastructure, and information management for pediatric outpatients and referrals. In SSORT interviews (n=47), the highest barriers to increasing pediatric surgery capacity were facility capacity (mean score=2.6 out of 5), psychological safety (median score=3.0 out of 5), and resistance to change (mean score=1.5 out of 5 with 5=no resistance). Conclusions: This study highlights challenges in providing safe and high-quality surgical care to pediatric patients in three rural district hospitals in Rwanda. It underscores the need for targeted interventions to address facility and organizational barriers prior to implementing interventions to expand pediatric surgical capacity.

Ethical dilemmas in prioritizing patients for scarce radiotherapy resources.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is an essential component of cancer treatment, yet many countries do not have adequate capacity to serve all patients who would benefit from it. Allocation systems are needed to guide patient prioritization for radiotherapy in resource-limited contexts. These systems should be informed by allocation principles deemed relevant to stakeholders. This study explores the ethical dilemmas and views of decision-makers engaged in real-world prioritization of scarce radiotherapy resources at a cancer center in Rwanda in order to identify relevant principles. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 22 oncology clinicians, program leaders, and clinical advisors. Interviews explored the factors considered by decision-makers when prioritizing patients for radiotherapy. The framework method of thematic analysis was used to characterize these factors. Bioethical analysis was then applied to determine their underlying normative principles. RESULTS: Participants considered both clinical and non-clinical factors relevant to patient prioritization for radiotherapy. They widely agreed that disease curability should be the primary overarching driver of prioritization, with the goal of saving the most lives. However, they described tension between curability and competing factors including age, palliative benefit, and waiting time. They were divided about the role that non-clinical factors such as social value should play, and agreed that poverty should not be a barrier. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple competing principles create tension with the agreed upon overarching goal of maximizing lives saved, including another utilitarian approach of maximizing life-years saved as well as non-utilitarian principles, such as egalitarianism, prioritarianism, and deontology. Clinical guidelines for patient prioritization for radiotherapy can combine multiple principles into a single allocation system to a significant extent. However, conflicting views about the role that social factors should play, and the dynamic nature of resource availability, highlight the need for ongoing work to evaluate and refine priority setting systems based on stakeholder views.

Patients' experiences undergoing breast evaluation in Rwanda's Women's Cancer Early Detection Program.

PURPOSE: There is urgent need for interventions to facilitate earlier diagnosis of breast cancer in low- and middle-income countries where mammography screening is not widely available. Understanding patients' experiences with early detection efforts, whether they are ultimately diagnosed with cancer or benign disease, is critical to optimize interventions and maximize community engagement. We sought to understand the experiences of patients undergoing breast evaluation in Rwanda's Women's Cancer Early Detection Program (WCEDP). METHODS: We conducted in-person semi-structured interviews with 30 patients in two districts of Rwanda participating in the WCEDP. Patients represented a range of ages and both benign and malignant diagnoses. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, translated, and thematically analyzed. RESULTS: Participants identified facilitators and barriers of timely care along the breast evaluation pathway. Community awareness initiatives were facilitators to care-seeking, while persistent myths and stigma about cancer were barriers. Participants valued clear clinician-patient communication and emotional support from clinicians and peers. Poverty was a major barrier for participants who described difficulty paying for transport, insurance premiums, and other direct and indirect costs of hospital referrals in particular. COVID-19 lockdowns caused delays for referred patients. Although false-positive clinical breast exams conferred financial and emotional burdens, participants nonetheless voiced appreciation for their experience and felt empowered to monitor their own breast health and share knowledge with others. CONCLUSION: Rwandan women experienced both benefits and burdens as they underwent breast evaluation. Enthusiasm for participation was not reduced by the experience of a false-positive result. Reducing financial, logistical and emotional burdens of the breast diagnostic pathway through patient navigation, peer support and decentralization of diagnostic services could improve patients' experience.

Impact of facilitating continued accessibility to cancer care during COVID-19 lockdown on perceived wellbeing of cancer patients at a rural cancer center in Rwanda.

During the COVID-19 pandemic in Rwanda, Partners In Health Inshuti Mu Buzima collaborated with the Butaro Cancer Center of Excellence (BCCOE) to mitigate disruptions to cancer care by providing patients with free transportation to treatment sites and medication delivery at patients' local health facilities. We assessed the relationship between facilitated access to care and self-reported wellbeing outcomes. This cross-sectional telephone survey included cancer patients enrolled at BCCOE in March 2020. We used linear regression to compare six dimensions of quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30), depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7), and financial toxicity (COST) among patients who did and did not receive facilitated access to care. We also assessed access to cancer care and whether patient wellbeing and its association with facilitated access to care differed by socioeconomic status. Of 214 respondents, 34.6% received facilitated access to care. Facilitated patients were more likely to have breast cancer and be on chemotherapy. Facilitation was significantly associated with more frequent in-person clinical encounters, improved perceived quality of cancer care, and reduced transportation-related barriers. Facilitated patients had significantly better global health status (ß = 9.14, 95% CI: 2.3, 16.0, p <0.01) and less financial toxicity (ß = 2.62, 95% CI: 0.2,5.0, p = 0.03). However, over half of patients reported missing or delaying appointment. Patient wellbeing was low overall and differed by patient socioeconomic status, with poor patients consistently showing worse outcomes. Socioeconomic status did not modify the association between facilitated access to care and wellbeing indicators. Further, facilitation did not lead to equitable wellbeing outcomes between richer and poorer patients. Facilitated access to care during COVID-19 pandemic was associated with some improvements in access to cancer care and patient wellbeing. However, cancer patients still experienced substantial disruptions to care and reported low overall levels of wellbeing, with socioeconomic disparities persisting despite facilitated access to care. Implementing more robust, equity-minded facilitation and better patient outreach programs during health emergencies may promote better care and strengthen patient care overall and effect better patients' outcomes.

Impact of COVID-19 on access to cancer care in Rwanda: a retrospective time-series study using electronic medical records data.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused disruptions in access to routine healthcare services worldwide, with a particularly high impact on chronic care patients and low and middle-income countries. In this study, we used routinely collected electronic medical records data to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on access to cancer care at the Butaro Cancer Center of Excellence (BCCOE) in rural Rwanda. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective time-series study among all Rwandan patients who received cancer care at the BCCOE between 1 January 2016 and 31 July 2021. The primary outcomes of interest included a comparison of the number of patients who were predicted based on time-series models of pre-COVID-19 trends versus the actual number of patients who presented during the COVID-19 period (between March 2020 and July 2021) across four key indicators: the number of new patients, number of scheduled appointments, number of clinical visits attended and the proportion of scheduled appointments completed on time. RESULTS: In total, 8970 patients (7140 patients enrolled before COVID-19 and 1830 patients enrolled during COVID-19) were included in this study. During the COVID-19 period, enrolment of new patients dropped by 21.7% (95% prediction interval (PI): -31.3%, -11.7%) compared with the pre-COVID-19 period. Similarly, the number of clinical visits was 25.0% (95% PI: -31.1%, -19.1%) lower than expected and the proportion of scheduled visits completed on time was 27.9% (95% PI: -39.8%, -14.1%) lower than expected. However, the number of scheduled visits did not deviate significantly from expected. CONCLUSION: Although scheduling procedures for visits continued as expected, our findings reveal that the COVID-19 pandemic interrupted patients' ability to access cancer care and attend scheduled appointments at the BCCOE. This interruption in care suggests delayed diagnosis and loss to follow-up, potentially resulting in a higher rate of negative health outcomes among cancer patients in Rwanda.

Food insecurity and level of depression among patients with chronic diseases, and associated factors during the COVID-19 lockdown: a cross-sectional study in rural Rwanda.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to describe access to food and symptoms of depression among patients with chronic diseases or their caregivers, and assess associated factors during the COVID-19 lockdown in rural Rwanda. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A stratified random sampling technique was used to recruit 220 patients enrolled in the HIV, non-communicable diseases, mental health, paediatric development clinic and oncology programmes in three rural districts of Rwanda. OUTCOME MEASURES: Telephone-based interviews were conducted to collect data on the number of daily meals before and during the COVID-19, and depression was assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. We used logistic regression analysis to investigate factors associated with households reporting a reduction in daily meals and with the survey respondent reporting symptoms of depression. RESULTS: Of the participants, 19.1% reported a reduction in daily number of meals for either adults or children in their households during lockdown and 24.6% had depression. Reporting a reduction in daily meals was associated with the district of residence and estimated household's monthly income. Self-reported depression was significantly associated with negative experiences during lockdown, including reporting feeling depressed or fear (AOR 4.82; 95% CI 2.08 to 11.21), loneliness (AOR 4.33; 95% CI 1.32 to 14.13), reduction in daily meals (AOR 4.15; 95% CI 1.56 to 11.00) and lack of access to healthcare (OR 3.29; 95% CI 1.32 to 8.23). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that significant reduction in access to food affected rural Rwandans with chronic diseases during COVID-19 lockdown, and the lockdown effect varied by household's pre-pandemic level of vulnerability to food insecurity. Reduction in household meals, as well as other self-reported effects of the lockdown, were associated with worse psychological status of survey respondents. Economic and food support should be considered by governments and non-governmental organisations to protect those most vulnerable including patients with chronic diseases against the effects of pandemics and their associated containment measures.

Barriers and coping mechanisms to accessing healthcare during the COVID-19 lockdown: a cross-sectional survey among patients with chronic diseases in rural Rwanda.

BACKGROUND: Large scale physical distancing measures and movement restrictions imposed to contain COVID-19, often referred to as 'lockdowns', abruptly and ubiquitously restricted access to routine healthcare services. This study describes reported barriers and coping mechanisms to accessing healthcare among chronic care patients during the nationwide COVID-19 lockdown in Rwanda. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted among chronic care patients enrolled in pediatric development, HIV/AIDS, non-communicable diseases, mental health, and oncology programs at 3 rural Rwandan districts. Active patients with an appointment scheduled between March-June 2020 and a phone number recorded in the electronic medical record system were eligible. Data were collected by telephone interviews between 23rd April and 11th May 2020, with proxy reporting by caregivers for children and critically ill-patients. Fisher's exact tests were used to measure associations. Logistic regression analysis was also used to assess factors associated with reporting at least one barrier to accessing healthcare during the lockdown. RESULTS: Of 220 patient respondents, 44% reported at least one barrier to accessing healthcare. Barriers included lack of access to emergency care (n = 50; 22.7%), lack of access to medication (n = 44; 20.0%) and skipping clinical appointments (n = 37; 16.8%). Experiencing barriers was associated with the clinical program (p < 0.001), with oncology patients being highly affected (64.5%), and with increasing distance from home to the health facility (p = 0.031). In the adjusted logistic regression model, reporting at least one barrier to accessing healthcare was associated with the patient's clinical program and district of residence. Forty (18.2%) patients identified positive coping mechanisms to ensure continuation of care, such as walking long distances during suspension of public transport (n = 21; 9.6%), contacting clinicians via telephone for guidance or rescheduling appointments (n = 15; 6.8%), and delegating someone else for medication pick-up (n = 6; 2.7%). Of 124 patients who reported no barriers to accessing healthcare, 9% used positive coping mechanisms. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of chronic care patients experienced barriers to accessing healthcare during the COVID-19 lockdown. However, many patients also independently identified positive coping mechanisms to ensure continuation of care - strategies that could be formally adopted by healthcare systems in Rwanda and similar settings to mitigate effects of future lockdowns on patients.