A Geospatial Analysis of the Availability, Distribution, and Accessibility of Neurosurgical Facilities, Workforce, and Infrastructure in Nigeria; and Projection Towards 2050.

OBJECTIVE: There has been a modest but progressive increase in the neurosurgical workforce, training, and service delivery in Nigeria in the last 2 decades. However, these resources are unevenly distributed. This study aimed to quantitatively assess the availability and distribution of neurosurgical resources in Nigeria while projecting the needed workforce capacity up to 2050. METHODS: An online survey of Nigerian neurosurgeons and residents assessed the country's neurosurgical infrastructure, workforce, and resources. The results were analyzed descriptively, and geospatial analysis was used to map their distribution. A projection model was fitted to predict workforce targets for 2022-2050. RESULTS: Out of 86 neurosurgery-capable health facilities, 65.1% were public hospitals, with only 17.4% accredited for residency training. Dedicated hospital beds and operating rooms for neurosurgery make up only 4.0% and 15.4% of the total, respectively. The population disease burden is estimated at 50.2 per 100,000, while the operative coverage was 153.2 cases per neurosurgeon. There are currently 132 neurosurgeons and 114 neurosurgery residents for a population of 218 million (ratio 1:1.65 million). There is an annual growth rate of 8.3%, resulting in a projected deficit of 1113 neurosurgeons by 2030 and 1104 by 2050. Timely access to neurosurgical care ranges from 21.6% to 86.7% of the population within different timeframes. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative interventions are needed to address gaps in Nigeria's neurosurgical capacity. Investments in training, infrastructure, and funding are necessary for sustainable development and optimized outcomes.

A Mixed-Methods Assessment of the Feasibility of Conducting Neurosurgical Clinical Research in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Clinical research is necessary to evaluate neurosurgical interventions, yet clinical trials are conducted less frequently in low- and middle-income countries. Because specific barriers, facilitating factors, and strategies for neurosurgical clinical research in Uganda have not been previously identified, this study evaluated neurosurgical providers' perspectives on clinical research and documentation patterns of neurosurgical variables at Mulago National Referral Hospital. METHODS: Retrospective review of 166 neurosurgical patient charts assessed the frequency of documentation of key variables. Twenty-two providers working in neurosurgery participated in 6 focus group discussions with qualitative analysis utilizing the framework method. RESULTS: Chart review showed that primary diagnosis (99.4%), pupil light response (97.6%), and computed tomography scan results (93.3%) were documented for most patients. Cranial nerve exam (61.5%), pupil size (69.9%), and time to neurosurgical intervention (45%) were documented less frequently. On average, Glasgow Coma Scale was documented for 86.6% of days hospitalized, while vital signs were documented for 12.3%. In most focus group discussions, participants identified follow-up, financing, recruitment, time, approval, and sociocultural factors as research barriers. Participants described how the current health workforce facilitates successful research. To improve research capacity, suggested strategies focused on research networks, data collection, leadership, participant recruitment, infrastructure, and implementation. CONCLUSIONS: At Mulago National Referral Hospital, there was variability in the frequency of documentation of neurosurgical variables, which may impact data collection for future studies. While multiple barriers were identified, sociocultural, financing, and time barriers greatly impacted neurosurgical clinical research. Despite that, identified facilitating factors and strategies could be utilized to support neurosurgical research capacity growth.

The Association Between Sociodemographic Factors, Social Determinants of Health, and Spine Surgical Patient Portal Utilization.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To examine patient portal use among the surgical spine patient population across different sociodemographic groups and assess the impact of patient portal use on clinical outcomes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Patient portals (PP) have been shown to improve outcomes and quality of care. Engaging them requires internet access, technological literacy, and dexterity, which may serve as access barriers. METHODS: After exclusion criteria were applied, the study included data for 9211 encounters from 7955 patients. PP utilization was defined as having activated and used the Duke University Medical Center patient portal system, MyChart, at least once. Sociodemographic characteristics included urbanicity, age, race, ethnicity, language, employment, and primary insurer. Clinical outcomes included the length of hospital stay during the procedure, 30-day return to the emergency department, 30-day readmission, and being discharged somewhere other than home. RESULTS: Being older than 65, non-White, unemployed, non-English-speaking, male, not-partnered, uninsured or publicly insured (Medicaid, Medicare and under 65 years of age, or other government insurance), and living in a rural environment were all risk factors for decreased PP utilization among surgical spine patients. A one-risk factor decrease in the number of social risk factors was associated with a 78% increase in the odds of PP utilization [odds ratio (OR): 1.78; 95% Confidence interval (CI): 1.69-1.87; P <0.001]. Patients not utilizing the portal at the time of their procedure had higher odds of 30-day readmission (OR: 1.59; 95% CI: 1.26-2.00), discharge somewhere other than home (OR: 2.41, 95% CI: 1.95-2.99), and an increased length of hospital stay (geometric mean ratio: 1.21; 95% CI: 1.12-1.30) compared with those who utilized it. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing spine procedures, PPs are not equally utilized among different sociodemographic groups. PP utilization is also associated with better outcomes. Interventions aimed at increasing PP uptake may improve care for certain patients.

Assessing the Success and Sustainability of Global Neurosurgery Collaborations: Systematic Review and Adaptation of the Framework for Assessment of InteRNational Surgical Success Criteria.

BACKGROUND: The high unmet neurosurgical burden in low- and middle-income countries has necessitated multiple global neurosurgical collaborations. We identified these collaborations and their peer-reviewed journal publications and evaluated them using a modified version of the Framework for Assessment of InteRNational Surgical Success (FAIRNeSS). METHODS: A systematic literature review yielded 265 articles describing neurosurgery-focused collaborations. A subset of 101 papers from 17 collaborations were evaluated with the modified FAIRNeSS criteria. Analysis of trends was performed for both individual articles and collaborations. RESULTS: Most of the articles were general reviews (64), and most focused on clinical research (115). The leading collaboration focus was workforce and infrastructure development (45%). Composite FAIRNeSS scores ranged from 7/34 to 30/34. Average FAIRNeSS scores for individual articles ranged from 0.25 to 26.75, while collaboration-wide FAIRNeSS score averages ranged from 5.25 to 20.04. There was significant variability within each subset of FAIRNeSS indicators (P value <0.001). Short-term goals had higher scores than medium- and long-term goals (P value <0.001). Collaboration composite scores correlated with the number of papers published (R2 = 0.400, P = 0.007) but not with the number of years active (R2 = 0.072, P = 0.3). Finally, the overall agreement between reviewers was 53.5%, and the overall correlation was 38.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Global neurosurgery has no established metrics for evaluating collaborations; therefore, we adapted the FAIRNeSS criteria to do so. The criteria may not be well suited for measuring the success and sustainability of global neurosurgery collaborations, creating a need to develop a more applicable alternate set of metrics.