A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness of Treating Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest: Implications for Resource-limited Health Systems.

Background: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a prevalent condition with high mortality and poor outcomes even in settings where extensive emergency care resources are available. Interventions to address OHCA have had limited success, with survival rates below 10% in national samples of high-income countries. In resource-limited settings, where scarcity requires careful priority setting, more data is needed to determine the optimal allocation of resources. Objective: To establish the cost-effectiveness of OHCA care and assess the affordability of interventions across income settings. Methods: The authors conducted a systematic review of economic evaluations on interventions to address OHCA. Included studies were (1) economic evaluations (beyond a simple costing exercise); and (2) assessed an intervention in the chain of survival for OHCA. Article quality was assessed using the CHEERs checklist and data summarised. Findings were reported by major themes identified by the reviewers. Based upon the results of the cost-effectiveness analyses we then conduct an analysis for the progressive realization of the OHCA chain of survival from the perspective of decision-makers facing resource constraints. Results: 468 unique articles were screened, and 46 articles were included for final data abstraction. Studies predominantly used a healthcare sector perspective, modeled for all patients experiencing non-traumatic cardiac OHCA, were based in the US, and presented results in US Dollars. No studies reported results or used model inputs from low-income settings. Progressive realization of the chain of survival could likely begin with investments in TOR protocols, professional prehospital defibrillator use, and CPR training followed by distribution of AEDs in high-density public locations. Finally, other interventions such as indiscriminate defibrillator placement or adrenaline use, would be the lowest priority for early investment. Conclusion: Our review found no high-quality evidence on the cost-effectiveness of treating OHCA in low-resource settings. Existing evidence can be utilized to develop a roadmap for the development of a cost-effective approach to OHCA care, however further economic evaluations using context-specific data are crucial to accurately inform prioritization of scarce resources within emergency care in these settings.

Road Traffic Injuries in South Africa: A Complex Global Health Crisis.

1.3 million people die each year as a result of Road traffic crashes. Road Traffic Injuries are a global health crisis with 90% of global deaths affecting LMICs. Sustainable Development Goal 3.6 focuses on reducing road injury and death. The global plan is based on the Safe Systems approach. In South Africa, the burden of crashes on the health system and society is particularly high with a population death rate of 20.7 per 100 000 population. Understanding local context and culture is critical. Rurality, distorted urban planning, higher travel exposure and alcohol usage disproportionately impact racial and ethnic minorities. Pedestrian safety is a key priority. There is a critical need for the global health community to take an active role in advocacy in order to achieve SDG 3.6 by 2030.

Towards developing a consensus assessment framework for global emergency medicine fellowships.

BACKGROUND: The number of Global Emergency Medicine (GEM) Fellowship training programs are increasing worldwide. Despite the increasing number of GEM fellowships, there is not an agreed upon approach for assessment of GEM trainees. MAIN BODY: In order to study the lack of standardized assessment in GEM fellowship training, a working group was established between the International EM Fellowship Consortium (IEMFC) and the International Federation for Emergency Medicine (IFEM). A needs assessment survey of IEMFC members and a review were undertaken to identify assessment tools currently in use by GEM fellowship programs; what relevant frameworks exist; and common elements used by programs with a wide diversity of emphases. A consensus framework was developed through iterative working group discussions. Thirty-two of 40 GEM fellowships responded (80% response). There is variability in the use and format of formal assessment between programs. Thirty programs reported training GEM fellows in the last 3 years (94%). Eighteen (56%) reported only informal assessments of trainees. Twenty-seven (84%) reported regular meetings for assessment of trainees. Eleven (34%) reported use of a structured assessment of any sort for GEM fellows and, of these, only 2 (18%) used validated instruments modified from general EM residency assessment tools. Only 3 (27%) programs reported incorporation of formal written feedback from partners in other countries. Using these results along with a review of the available assessment tools in GEM the working group developed a set of principles to guide GEM fellowship assessments along with a sample assessment for use by GEM fellowship programs seeking to create their own customized assessments. CONCLUSION: There are currently no widely used assessment frameworks for GEM fellowship training. The working group made recommendations for developing standardized assessments aligned with competencies defined by the programs, that characterize goals and objectives of training, and document progress of trainees towards achieving those goals. Frameworks used should include perspectives of multiple stakeholders including partners in other countries where trainees conduct field work. Future work may evaluate the usability, validity and reliability of assessment frameworks in GEM fellowship training.

Assessment of routine laboratory screening of adult psychiatric patients presenting to an emergency centre in Cape Town.

Our study suggests that routine laboratory screening provides no additional information to that obtained from a thorough history and clinical examination in patients at high risk of having an underlying medical cause of presenting psychotic symptoms.