An introduction to digital determinants of health.

In recent years, technology has been increasingly incorporated within healthcare for the provision of safe and efficient delivery of services. Although this can be attributed to the benefits that can be harnessed, digital technology has the potential to exacerbate and reinforce preexisting health disparities. Previous work has highlighted how sociodemographic, economic, and political factors affect individuals' interactions with digital health systems and are termed social determinants of health [SDOH]. But, there is a paucity of literature addressing how the intrinsic design, implementation, and use of technology interact with SDOH to influence health outcomes. Such interactions are termed digital determinants of health [DDOH]. This paper will, for the first time, propose a definition of DDOH and provide a conceptual model characterizing its influence on healthcare outcomes. Specifically, DDOH is implicit in the design of artificial intelligence systems, mobile phone applications, telemedicine, digital health literacy [DHL], and other forms of digital technology. A better appreciation of DDOH by the various stakeholders at the individual and societal levels can be channeled towards policies that are more digitally inclusive. In tandem with ongoing work to minimize the digital divide caused by existing SDOH, further work is necessary to recognize digital determinants as an important and distinct entity.

A practical tool for managing change: cross-sectional psychometric assessment of the safe surgery organizational readiness tool.

BACKGROUND: Strengthening health systems through planned safety and quality improvement initiatives is an imperative to achieve more equitable, resilient, and effective care. And yet, years of organizational behavior research demonstrate that change initiatives often fall short because managers fail to account for organizational readiness for change. This finding remains true especially among surgical safety and quality improvement initiatives in low-income countries and middle-income countries. In this study, our aim was to psychometrically assess the construct validity and internal consistency of the Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool (SSORT), a short survey tool designed to provide change leaders with insight into facility infrastructure that supports learning and readiness to undertake change. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To demonstrate generalizability and achieve a large sample size ( n =1706) to conduct exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), a collaboration between seven surgical and anesthesia safety and quality improvement initiatives was formed. Collected survey data from health care workers were divided into pilot, exploration, and confirmation samples. The pilot sample was used to assess feasibility. The exploration sample was used to conduct EFA, while the confirmation sample was used to conduct CFA. Factor internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. RESULTS: Results of the EFA retained 9 of the 16 proposed factors associated with readiness to change. CFA results of the identified 9 factor model, measured by 28 survey items, demonstrated excellent fit to data. These factors (appropriateness, resistance to change, team efficacy, team learning orientation, team valence, communication about change, learning environment, vision for sustainability, and facility capacity) were also found to be internally consistent. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that communication, team learning, and supportive environment are components of change readiness that can be reliably measured prior to implementation of projects that promote surgical safety and quality improvement in low-income countries and middle-income countries. Future research can link performance on identified factors to outcomes that matter most to patients.

A Financing Strategy to Expand Surgical Health Care.

Despite an evolving need to provide surgical health care globally, few health systems, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), can sufficiently provide such care. The vast majority of the world's people-an estimated 5 billion-are unable to access safe and affordable surgical health care when they need it. This is a significant concern for global public health because the demand for these services is rising with the epidemiological and demographic transitions occurring worldwide. A principal driver of weak surgical health care services is a lack of adequate health system financing for surgical health care. This article examines the financing of surgical health care by analyzing global trends in health system financing, approaches to expand fiscal space for health, and empirical perspectives on the design, introduction, and scale-up of policies to improve surgical systems. We describe a surgical health care financing strategy, together with broader political and economic considerations, to provide policy recommendations to fund the expansion of surgical health care and an essential surgical package as part of universal health coverage in LMICs.

Implementing surgical mentorship in a resource-constrained context: a mixed methods assessment of the experiences of mentees, mentors, and leaders, and lessons learned.

BACKGROUND: A well-qualified workforce is critical to effective functioning of health systems and populations; however, skill gaps present a challenge in low-resource settings. While an emerging body of evidence suggests that mentorship can improve quality, access, and systems in African health settings by building the capacity of health providers, less is known about its implementation in surgery. We studied a novel surgical mentorship intervention as part of a safe surgery intervention (Safe Surgery 2020) in five rural Ethiopian facilities to understand factors affecting implementation of surgical mentorship in resource-constrained settings. METHODS: We designed a convergent mixed-methods study to understand the experiences of mentees, mentors, hospital leaders, and external stakeholders with the mentorship intervention. Quantitative data was collected through a survey (n = 25) and qualitative data through in-depth interviews (n = 26) in 2018 to gather information on (1) intervention characteristics including areas of mentorship, mentee-mentor relationships, and mentor characteristics, (2) organizational context including facilitators and barriers to implementation, (3) perceived impact, and (4) respondent characteristics. We analyzed the quantitative and qualitative data using frequency analysis and the constant comparison method, respectively; we integrated findings to identify themes. RESULTS: All mentees (100%) experienced the intervention as positive. Participants perceived impact as: safer and more frequent surgical procedures, collegial bonds between mentees and mentors, empowerment among mentees, and a culture of continuous learning. Over 70% of all mentees reported their confidence and job satisfaction increased. Supportive intervention characteristics included a systems focus, psychologically safe mentee-mentor relationships, and mentor characteristics including generosity with time and knowledge, understanding of local context, and interpersonal skills. Supportive organizational context included a receptive implementation climate. Intervention challenges included insufficient clinical training, inadequate mentor support, and inadequate dose. Organizational context challenges included resource constraints and a lack of common understanding of the intervention. CONCLUSION: We offer lessons for intervention designers, policy makers, and practitioners about optimizing surgical mentorship interventions in resource-constrained settings. We attribute the intervention's success to its holistic approach, a receptive climate, and effective mentee-mentor relationships. These qualities, along with policy support and adapting the intervention through user feedback are important for successful implementation.

Defining Surgical Workforce Density Targets to Meet Child and Neonatal Mortality Rate Targets in the Age of the Sustainable Development Goals: A Global Cross-Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVES: To reduce preventable deaths of newborns and children, the United Nations set a target rate per 1000 live births of 12 for neonatal mortality (NMR) and 25 for under-5 mortality (U5MR). The purpose of this paper is to define the minimum surgical workforce needed to meet these targets and evaluate the relative impact of increasing surgeon, anesthesia, and obstetrician (SAO) density on reducing child mortality. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 192 countries to define the association between surgical workforce density and U5MR as well as NMR using unadjusted and adjusted B-spline regression, adjusting for common non-surgical causes of childhood mortality. We used these models to estimate the minimum surgical workforce to meet the sustainable development goals (SDGs) for U5MR and NMR and marginal effects plots to determine over which range of SAO densities the largest impact is seen as countries scale-up SAO workforce. RESULTS: We found that increased SAO density is associated with decreased U5MR and NMR (P < 0.05), adjusting for common non-surgical causes of child mortality. A minimum SAO density of 10 providers per 100,000 population (95% CI: 7-13) is associated with an U5MR of < 25 per 1000 live births. A minimum SAO density of 12 (95% CI: 9-20) is associated with an NMR of < 12 per 1000 live births. The maximum decrease in U5MR, on the basis of our adjusted B-spline model, occurs from 0 to 20 SAO per 100,000 population. The maximum decrease in NMR based on our adjusted B-spline model occurs up from 0 to 18 SAO, with additional decrease seen up to 80 SAO. CONCLUSIONS: Scale-up of the surgical workforce to 12 SAO per 100,000 population may help health systems meet the SDG goals for childhood mortality rates. Increases in up to 80 SAO/100,000 continue to offer mortality benefit for neonates and would help to achieve the SDGs for neonatal mortality reduction.

Access and Financial Burden for Patients Seeking Essential Surgical Care in Pakistan.

Background: Pakistan is a lower middle-income country in South Asia with a population of over 220 million. With the recent development of national health programs focusing on surgical care, two areas of high priority for research and policy are access and financial risk protection related to surgery. This is the first study in Pakistan to nationally assess geographic access and expenditures for patients undergoing surgery. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study of patients undergoing laparotomy, cesarean section, and surgical management of a fracture at public tertiary care hospitals across the country. A validated financial risk protection tool was adapted for our study to collect data on the socio-economic characteristics of patients, geographic access, and out-of-pocket expenditure. Results: A total of 526 patients were surveyed at 13 public hospitals. 73.8% of patients had 2-hour access to the facility where they underwent their respective surgical procedures. A majority (53%) of patients were poor at baseline, and 79.5% and 70.3% of patients experienced catastrophic health expenditure and impoverishing health expenditure, respectively. Discussion: A substantial number of patients face long travel times to access essential surgical care and face a high percentage of impoverishing health expenditure and catastrophic health expenditure during this process. This study provides valuable baseline data to health policymakers for reform efforts that are underway. Conclusions: Strengthening surgical infrastructure and services in the existing network of public sector first-level facilities has the potential to dramatically improve emergency and essential surgical care across the country.

The future of global health is inclusive and anti-racist.

In global health, a discipline with a racist and colonial history, white supremacy, white privilege and racism are still present today.1 Although many believe we are witnessing a resurgence of racism in global health, because of a recent rise of extreme right comments and racism in the community and online2, 3. In reality racism has always been an inherent aspect of global health and its predecessors: tropical health and international health by prioritizing the health issues of the colonizers over those of the native populations.4 As such, we are rather bearing witness to long standing issues that have been persistently overlooked. There is a need for a paradigm shift to enable true authentic leadership that promotes the values of our shared humanity.

A multimodal mentorship intervention to improve surgical quality in Tanzania's Lake Zone: a convergent, mixed methods assessment.

BACKGROUND: Safe, high-quality surgical care in many African countries is a critical need. Challenges include availability of surgical providers, improving quality of care, and building workforce capacity. Despite growing evidence that mentoring is effective in African healthcare settings, less is known about its role in surgery. We examined a multimodal approach to mentorship as part of a safe surgery intervention (Safe Surgery 2020) to improve surgical quality. Our goal was to distill lessons for policy makers, intervention designers, and practitioners on key elements of a successful surgical mentorship program. METHODS: We used a convergent, mixed-methods design to examine the experiences of mentees, mentors, and facility leaders with mentorship at 10 health facilities in Tanzania's Lake Zone. A multidisciplinary team of mentors worked with surgical providers over 17 months using in-person mentorship, telementoring, and WhatsApp. We conducted surveys, in-depth interviews, and focus groups to capture data in four categories: (1) satisfaction with mentorship; (2) perceived impact; (3) elements of a successful mentoring program; and (4) challenges to implementing mentorship. We analyzed quantitative data using frequency analysis and qualitative data using the constant comparison method. Recurrent and unifying concepts were identified through merging the qualitative and quantitative data. RESULTS: Overall, 96% of mentees experienced the intervention as positive, 88% were satisfied, and 100% supported continuing the intervention in the future. Mentees, mentors, and facility leaders perceived improvements in surgical practice, the surgical ecosystem, and in reducing postsurgical infections. Several themes related to the intervention's success emerged: (1) the intervention's design, including its multimodality, side-by-side mentorship, and standardization of practices; (2) the mentee-mentor relationship, including a friendly, safe, non-hierarchical, team relationship, as well as mentors' understanding of the local context; and (3) mentorship characteristics, including non-judgmental feedback, experience, and accessibility. Challenges included resistance to change, shortage of providers, mentorship dose, and logistics. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests a multimodal mentorship approach is promising in building the capacity of surgical providers. By distilling the experiences of the mentees, mentors, and facility leaders, our lessons provide a foundation for future efforts to establish effective surgical mentorship programs that build provider capacity and ultimately improve surgical quality.

Harvard Medical School Department of Global Health and Social Medicine COVID-19 seminar series: COVID and surgical, anesthetic and obstetric care.

On May 21, 2020, the Harvard Program in Global Surgery and Social Change (PGSSC) hosted a webinar as part of the Harvard Medical School Department of Global Health and Social Medicine's COVID-19 webinar series. The goal of PGSSC's virtual webinar was to share the experiences of surgical, anesthesia, and obstetric (SAO) providers on the frontlines of the COVID pandemic, from both high-income countries (HICs), such as the United States and the United Kingdom, as well as low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Providers shared not only their experiences delivering SAO care during this global pandemic, but also solutions and innovations they and their colleagues developed to address these new challenges. Additionally, the seminar explored the relationship between surgery and health system strengthening and pandemic preparedness, and outlined the way forward, including a roadmap for prioritization and investment in surgical system strengthening. Throughout the discussion, other themes emerged as well, such as the definition of elective surgery and its implications during a persistent global pandemic, the safe and ethical reintroduction of surgical services, and the social inequities exposed by the stress placed on health systems by COVID-19. These proceedings document the perspectives shared by participants through their invited lectures as well as through the panel discussion at the end of the seminar.

Applying the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) Framework to Safe Surgery 2020 Implementation in Tanzania's Lake Zone.

BACKGROUND: Access to safe, high-quality surgical care in sub-Saharan Africa is a critical gap. Interventions to improve surgical quality have been developed, but research on their implementation is still at a nascent stage. We retrospectively applied the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment framework to characterize the implementation of Safe Surgery 2020, a multicomponent intervention to improve surgical quality. METHODS: We used a longitudinal, qualitative research design to examine Safe Surgery 2020 in 10 health facilities in Tanzania's Lake Zone. We used documentation analysis with confirmatory key informant interviews (n = 6) to describe the exploration and preparation phases. We conducted interviews with health facility leaders and surgical team members at 1, 6, and 12 months (n = 101) post initiation to characterize the implementation phase. Data were analyzed using the constant comparison method. RESULTS: In the exploration phase, research, expert consultation, and scoping activities revealed the need for a multicomponent intervention to improve surgical quality. In the preparation phase, onsite visits identified priorities and barriers to implementation to adapt the intervention components and curriculum. In the active implementation phase, 4 themes related to the inner organizational context-vision for safe surgery, existing surgical practices, leadership support, and resilience-and 3 themes related to the intervention-innovation-value fit, holistic approach, and buy-in-facilitated or hindered implementation. Interviewees perceived improvements in teamwork and communication and intra- and inter-facility learning, and their need to deliver safe surgery evolved during the implementation period. CONCLUSIONS: Examining implementation through the exploration, preparation, implementation, and sustainment phases offers insights into the implementation of interventions to improve surgical quality and promote sustainability.

Access to Essential Surgical Care in Chiapas, Mexico: A System-Wide Geospatial Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Long travel times to reach essential surgical care in Chiapas, Mexico's poorest state, can delay lifesaving procedures and contribute to adverse outcomes. Geographical access to surgical facilities is 1 of the 6 indicators of the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery and has been measured extensively worldwide. Our objective is to determine the population with 2-h geographical access to facilities capable of performing the Bellwether procedures (laparotomy, cesarean delivery, and open fracture repair). This is the first study in Mexico to assess access to surgical facilities, including both the fragmented public sector and the private sector. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, conducted from June 2019 to January 2020, Bellwether capable surgical facilities from all health systems in Chiapas were geocoded and assessed through on-site data collection, Ministry of Health databases, and verified via telephone. Geospatial analyses were performed on Redivis. RESULTS: We identified 59 Bellwether capable hospitals, with 17.5% (n = 954,460) of the state residing more than 2 h from surgical care in public and private health systems. Of those, 22 facilities had confirmed 24/7 Bellwether capability, and 23% (n = 1,178,383) of the affiliated population resided more than 2 h from these hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that the Ministry of Health and employment-based health coverage could provide timely access to essential surgical care for the majority of the population. However, the fragmentation of the healthcare system leaves a gap that contributes to delays in care and unmet emergency surgical needs.

Empowering Surgeons, Anesthesiologists, and Obstetricians to Incorporate Environmental Sustainability in the Operating Room.

OBJECTIVE: We review the existing research on environmentally sustainable surgical practices to enable SAO to advocate for improved environmental sustainability in operating rooms across the country. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Climate change refers to the impact of greenhouse gases emitted as a byproduct of human activities, trapped within our atmosphere and resulting in hotter and more variable climate patterns.1 As of 2013, the US healthcare industry was responsible for 9.8% of the country's emissions2; if it were itself a nation, US healthcare would rank 13th globally in emissions.3 As one of the most energy-intensive and wasteful areas of the hospital, ORs drive this trend. ORs are 3 to 6 times more energy intensive than clinical wards.4 Further, ORs and labor/delivery suites produce 50%-70% of waste across the hospital.5,6 Due to the adverse health impacts of climate change, the Lancet Climate Change Commission (2009) declared climate change "the biggest global health threat of the 21st century" and predicted it would exacerbate existing health disparities for minority groups, children and low socioeconomic patients.7. METHODS/RESULTS: We provide a comprehensive narrative review of published efforts to improve environmental sustainability in the OR while simultaneously achieving cost-savings, and highlight resources for clinicians interested in pursuing this work. CONCLUSION: Climate change adversely impacts patient health, and disproportionately impacts the most vulnerable patients. SAO contribute to the problem through their resource-intensive work in the OR and are uniquely positioned to lead efforts to improve the environmental sustainability of the OR.

Time-Driven, Activity-Based Costing of Presurgical Infant Orthopedics: A Critical Component of Establishing Value of Latham Appliance and Nasoalveolar Molding.

BACKGROUND: Value-based health-care reform requires assessment of outcomes and costs of medical interventions. In cleft care, presurgical infant orthopedics is still being evaluated for clinical benefits and risks; however, the cost of these procedures has been largely ignored. This study uses robust accounting methods to quantify the cost of providing two types of presurgical infant orthopedics: Latham appliance treatment and nasoalveolar molding. METHODS: This is a prospective study of patients with nonsyndromic cleft lip and/or palate who underwent treatment with presurgical infant orthopedics from 2017 to 2019 at two academic centers. Costs were measured using time-driven activity-based costing. Personnel costs, facility costs (operating room, clinic, and inpatient ward), and equipment costs were included. Travel expenses were incorporated as an estimate of direct costs borne by the family, but indirect costs (e.g., time off from work) were not considered. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were treated with Latham appliance treatment and 14 were treated with nasoalveolar molding. For Latham appliance treatment, average total cost was $7553 per patient ($1041 for personnel, $637 for equipment, $4871 for facility, and $1004 for travel over 6.5 visits). Unilateral and bilateral costs were $6891 and $8860, respectively. For nasoalveolar molding, average cost totaled $2541 ($364 for personnel, $151 for equipment, $300 for facility, and $1726 for travel over 13 visits); $2120 for unilateral and $3048 for bilateral treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The major difference in cost is attributable to operative placement of the Latham device. Travel cost for nasoalveolar molding is often higher because of frequent clinical encounters required. Future investigation should focus on whether outcomes achieved by presurgical infant orthopedics justify the $2100 to $8900 expenditure for these adjunctive procedures.

A country-level comparison of access to quality surgical and non-surgical healthcare from 1990-2016.

BACKGROUND: The Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) index, developed by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, uses estimates of amenable mortality to quantify health system performance over time. While much is known about general health system performance globally, few studies have portrayed the performance of surgical systems. In order to quantify access to quality surgical care, evaluate changes over time, and link these changes to health care investments, surgical and non-surgical Health Access and Quality sub-indices were developed. DESIGN: We categorized 32 amenable mortality causes as either surgical or non-surgical conditions. Using principal components analysis and scaled amenable mortality rates, we constructed a surgical and non-surgical Health Access and Quality sub-index. Using these sub-indices, relative improvement over time was compared. An expenditure model with country fixed effects was built to explore drivers of differences in relative improvement of sub-indices. RESULTS: Compared to low-income countries, high-income countries have been 2.77 times more effective at improving surgical care (p < .05). Government expenditure on healthcare has a larger effect on improving surgical Health Access and Quality (p < 0.05) while development assistance for health has a larger effect on improving non-surgical Health Access and Quality (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Global health investment must prioritize strengthening health systems as opposed to the historically favored vertical programming. In order to achieve health equity in low-income countries, more focus should be placed on domestic financing of surgical systems. Health Access and Quality sub-indices can be used by countries to identify targets, monitor progress, and evaluate interventions aimed at improving access to quality surgical healthcare.

Identifying essential components of surgical care delivery through quality improvement: An updated surgical assessment tool.

BACKGROUND: Surgical care is a cost-effective intervention with major public health impact. Yet, five billion people do not have access to surgical and anesthesia care. This overwhelming unmet need has generated a rising interest in scale-up of these services globally. The purpose of this research was to aggregate available guidelines and create a synthesized tool that could provide valuable information at the local, national, and international health system levels. METHODS: A systematic review identified current documents cataloging elements for surgical care provision. Items with a reported frequency of >30% were included in the initial draft of the Surgical Assessment Tool. This underwent two cycles of Delphi-method expert opinion elicitation from providers working in low- and middle-income settings. Finally, the tool underwent vetting by the World Health Organization to create an expert-endorsed survey. RESULTS: Fifteen surgical tools were identified, containing a total of 216 unique elements in the following domains: infrastructure (n = 152), service delivery (n = 49), and workforce (n = 15). The final tool consisted of 169 items in the following domains: infrastructure (n = 35), service delivery (n = 92), workforce (n = 20), information management (n = 10), and financing (n = 12). CONCLUSION: Informed planning is critical to ensure successful expansion of surgical services. Our analysis of current tools shows varying agreement on the essential components of surgical care delivery. This updated tool serves as a crucial method to systematically assess surgical systems as well as monitor, modify, and strengthen in a scalable fashion. Importantly, it has the potential to be used in all settings after adaptation to local context.

Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery: An Opportunity to Improve Surgical Care and Advance Sustainable Development Globally.

Global health has evolved to focus on reducing health inequity and obtaining the highest attainable standard of health for all people. To do this, a range of actors now pursue interventions and policy with an eye toward global targets that place strong emphasis on improving health systems. Within global health, global surgery has sought to delineate the burden of surgical disease and propose policy to improve access to surgery. Oral and maxillofacial surgery has been underrepresented in global health but has a vital role in reducing the global health inequity attributable to the impact of oral and craniofacial conditions.