A geospatial evaluation of timely access to surgical care in seven countries.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the consistent availability of basic surgical resources at selected facilities in seven countries. METHODS: In 2010-2014, we used a situational analysis tool to collect data at district and regional hospitals in Bangladesh (n = 14), the Plurinational State of Bolivia (n = 18), Ethiopia (n = 19), Guatemala (n = 20), the Lao People's Democratic Republic (n = 12), Liberia (n = 12) and Rwanda (n = 25). Hospital sites were selected by pragmatic sampling. Data were geocoded and then analysed using an online data visualization platform. Each hospital's catchment population was defined as the people who could reach the hospital via a vehicle trip of no more than two hours. A hospital was only considered to show consistent availability of basic surgical resources if clean water, electricity, essential medications including intravenous fluids and at least one anaesthetic, analgesic and antibiotic, a functional pulse oximeter, a functional sterilizer, oxygen and providers accredited to perform surgery and anaesthesia were always available. FINDINGS: Only 41 (34.2%) of the 120 study hospitals met the criteria for the provision of consistent basic surgical services. The combined catchments of the study hospitals in each study country varied between 3.3 million people in Liberia and 151.3 million people in Bangladesh. However, the combined catchments of the study hospitals in each study country that met the criteria for the provision of consistent basic surgical services were substantially smaller and varied between 1.3 million in Liberia and 79.2 million in Bangladesh. CONCLUSION: Many study facilities were deficient in the basic infrastructure necessary for providing basic surgical care on a consistent basis.

Prioritizing essential surgery and safe anesthesia for the Post-2015 Development Agenda: operative capacities of 78 district hospitals in 7 low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Surgery has been neglected in low- and middle-income countries for decades. It is vital that the Post-2015 Development Agenda reflect that surgery is an important part of a comprehensive global health care delivery model. We compare the operative capacities of multiple low- and middle-income countries and identify critical gaps in surgical infrastructure. METHODS: The Harvard Humanitarian Initiative survey tool was used to assess the operative capacities of 78 government district hospitals in Bangladesh (n = 7), Bolivia (n = 11), Ethiopia (n = 6), Liberia (n = 11), Nicaragua (n = 10), Rwanda (n = 21), and Uganda (n = 12) from 2011 to 2012. Key outcome measures included infrastructure, equipment availability, physician and nonphysician surgical providers, operative volume, and pharmaceutical capacity. RESULTS: Seventy of 78 district hospitals performed operations. There was fewer than one surgeon or anesthesiologist per 100,000 catchment population in all countries except Bolivia. There were no physician anesthesiologists in any surveyed hospitals in Rwanda, Liberia, Uganda, or in the majority of hospitals in Ethiopia. Mean annual operations per hospital ranged from 374 in Nicaragua to 3,215 in Bangladesh. Emergency operations and obstetric operations constituted 57.5% and 40% of all operations performed, respectively. Availability of pulse oximetry, essential medicines, and key infrastructure (water, electricity, oxygen) varied widely between and within countries. CONCLUSION: The need for operative procedures is not being met by the limited operative capacity in numerous low- and middle-income countries. It is of paramount importance that this gap be addressed by prioritizing essential surgery and safe anesthesia in the Post-2015 Development Agenda.

A systematic review of radiotherapy capacity in low- and middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVES: The cancer burden in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) is substantial. The purpose of this study was to identify and describe country and region-specific patterns of radiotherapy (RT) facilities in LMIC. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken. A search strategy was developed to include articles on radiation capacity in LMIC from the following databases: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL Plus, Global Health, and the Latin American and Caribbean System on Health Sciences Information. Searches included all literature up to April 2013. RESULTS: A total of 49 articles were included in the review. Studies reviewed were divided into one of four regions: Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, and South America. The African continent has the least amount of resources for RT. Furthermore, a wide disparity exists, as 60% of all machines on the continent are concentrated in Egypt and South Africa while 29 countries in Africa are still lacking any RT resource. A significant heterogeneity also exists across Southeast Asia despite a threefold increase in megavoltage teletherapy machines from 1976 to 1999, which corresponds with a rise in economic status. In LMIC of the Americas, only Uruguay met the International Atomic Energy Agency recommendations of 4 MV/million population, whereas Bolivia and Venezuela had the most radiation oncologists (>1 per 1000 new cancer cases). The main concern with the review of RT resources in Eastern Europe was the lack of data. CONCLUSION: There is a dearth of publications on RT therapy infrastructure in LMIC. However, based on limited published data, availability of RT resources reflects the countries' economic status. The challenges to delivering radiation in the discussed regions are multidimensional and include lack of physical resources, lack of human personnel, and lack of data. Furthermore, access to existing RT and affordability of care remains a large problem.

Challenges of surgery in developing countries: a survey of surgical and anesthesia capacity in Uganda's public hospitals.

BACKGROUND: There are large disparities in access to surgical services due to a multitude of factors, including insufficient health human resources, infrastructure, medicines, equipment, financing, logistics, and information reporting. This study aimed to assess these important factors in Uganda's government hospitals as part of a larger study examining surgical and anesthesia capacity in low-income countries in Africa. METHODS: A standardized survey tool was administered via interviews with Ministry of Health officials and key health practitioners at 14 public government hospitals throughout the country. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: There were a total of 107 general surgeons, 97 specialty surgeons, 124 obstetricians/gynecologists (OB/GYNs), and 17 anesthesiologists in Uganda, for a rate of one surgeon per 100,000 people. There was 0.2 major operating theater per 100,000 people. Altogether, 53% of all operations were general surgery cases, and 44% were OB/GYN cases. In all, 73% of all operations were performed on an emergency basis. All hospitals reported unreliable supplies of water and electricity. Essential equipment was missing across all hospitals, with no pulse oximeters found at any facilities. A uniform reporting mechanism for outcomes did not exist. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of vital human resources and infrastructure to provide adequate, safe surgery at many of the government hospitals in Uganda. A large number of surgical procedures are undertaken despite these austere conditions. Many areas that need policy development and international collaboration are evident. Surgical services need to become a greater priority in health care provision in Uganda as they could promise a significant reduction in morbidity and mortality.