The Need for Children's Surgical Care Prioritisation in National Surgical Care Policies: A Systematic Review of National Surgical Obstetric and Anaesthetic Plans (NSOAPs) in Sub-Saharan Africa.

BACKGROUND: Children born in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) have an 85 % risk of requiring surgical care by the age of 15 [1,2]. Yet, children's surgery has been largely neglected by global health policies. National Surgical Obstetric and Anaesthetic Plans' (NSOAPs) reflect countries' strategic health priorities, policies, and targets related to surgical care. This study assessed the prioritisation of children's surgical care in national surgical care policies in SSA. METHODS: This systematic review of national surgical care policies in SSA conducted in December 2022, analysed NSOAPs developed in SSA electronically for search terms "child∗", "pediatric∗", "paediatric∗" and evaluated manually for children's surgical care in relation to the NSOAP domains, health system building blocks, and surgical care. Policies were evaluated for collaboration. RESULTS: Eight policies met the inclusion criteria. In the 797 (M = 99.63; SD = 34.83) text-containing pages analysed, there were 258 (15.5; 0-164) mentions of children's surgery search terms. Twenty-five percent (n = 2) of the NSOAPs dedicated sections to children's surgical care, 62.5 % (n = 5) mentioned children's surgery, and 12.5 % (n = 1) did not mention children's surgery. Children's surgery received citations in 25 % (n = 2) of backgrounds, 37.5 % (n = 3) of situational analyses, 87.5 % (n = 7) of strategic frameworks, 37.5 % (n = 3) of monitoring and evaluation, and 25 % (n = 2) of the costing sections. Overall, 62.5 % (n = 5) of countries included a children's surgery stakeholder. CONCLUSION: NSOAPs are a pragmatic measure of national surgical care priorities. Our findings suggest children's surgery is not widely recognised even where commitments to improving surgical care exist. Greater prioritisation of children's surgery is needed in surgical policy development.

National Surgical Healthcare Policy Development and Implementation: Where do We Stand in Africa?

BACKGROUND: National surgical policies have been increasingly adopted by African countries over the past decade. This report is intended to provide an overview of the current state of adoption of national surgical healthcare policies in Africa, and to draw a variety of lessons from representative surgical plans in order to support transnational learning. METHODS: Through a desk review of available African national surgical healthcare plans and written contributions from a committee comprising six African surgical policy development experts, a few key lessons from five healthcare plans were outlined and iteratively reviewed. RESULTS: The current state of national surgical healthcare policies across Africa was visually mapped, and lessons from a few compelling examples are highlighted. These include the power of initiative from Senegal; regional leadership from Zambia; contextualization, and renewal of commitment from Ethiopia; multidisciplinary focus and creation of multiple implementation entry points from Nigeria; partnerships and involvement of multiple stakeholders from Rwanda; and the challenge of surgical policy financing from Tanzania. The availability of global expertise, the power of global partnerships, and the critical role of health ministries and Ministers of Health in planning and implementation have also been highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: Strategic planning for surgical healthcare improvement is at various stages across the continent, with potential for countries to learn from one another. Convenings of stakeholders and Ministers of Health from countries at various stages of strategic surgical plan development, execution, and evaluation can enhance African surgical policy development through the exchange of ideas, lessons, and experiences.

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.

Assessing the inclusion of children's surgical care in National Surgical, Obstetric and Anaesthesia Plans: a policy content analysis.

OBJECTIVE: While National Surgical, Obstetric and Anaesthesia Plans (NSOAPs) have emerged as a strategy to strengthen and scale up surgical healthcare systems in low/middle-income countries (LMICs), the degree to which children's surgery is addressed is not well-known. This study aims to assess the inclusion of children's surgical care among existing NSOAPs, identify practice examples and provide recommendations to guide inclusion of children's surgical care in future policies. DESIGN: We performed two qualitative content analyses to assess the inclusion of children's surgical care among NSOAPs. We applied a conventional (inductive) content analysis approach to identify themes and patterns, and developed a framework based on the Global Initiative for Children's Surgery's Optimal Resources for Children's Surgery document. We then used this framework to conduct a directed (deductive) content analysis of the NSOAPs of Ethiopia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania and Zambia. RESULTS: Our framework for the inclusion of children's surgical care in NSOAPs included seven domains. We evaluated six NSOAPs with all addressing at least two of the domains. All six NSOAPs addressed 'human resources and training' and 'infrastructure', four addressed 'service delivery', three addressed 'governance and financing', two included 'research, evaluation and quality improvement', and one NSOAP addressed 'equipment and supplies' and 'advocacy and awareness'. CONCLUSIONS: Additional focus must be placed on the development of surgical healthcare systems for children in LMICs. This requires a focus on children's surgical care separate from adult surgical care in the scaling up of surgical healthcare systems, including children-focused needs assessments and the inclusion of children's surgery providers in the process. This study proposes a framework for evaluating NSOAPs, highlights practice examples and suggests recommendations for the development of future policies.

Operative Trauma Courses: A Scoping Review to Inform the Development of a Trauma Surgery Course for Low-Resource Settings.

BACKGROUND: A multitude of operative trauma courses exist, most of which are designed for and conducted in high-resource settings. There are numerous barriers to adapting such courses to low- and low-middle-income countries (LMICs), including resource constraints and contextual variations in trauma care. Approaches to implementing operative trauma courses in LMICs have not been evaluated in a structured manner. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of the literature including databases (e.g., PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE), grey literature repositories, and structured queries of publicly available course materials to identify records that described operative trauma courses offered since 2000. RESULTS: The search identified 3,518 non-duplicative records, of which 48 relevant reports were included in analysis. These reports represented 23 named and 11 unnamed operative trauma courses offered in 12 countries. Variability existed in course format and resource requirements, ranging from USD 40 to 3,000 per participant. Courses incorporated didactic and laboratory components, which utilized simulations, cadavers, or live animals. Course content overlapped significantly but was not standardized. Data were lacking on course implementation and promulgation, credentialing of instructors, and standardized evaluation metrics. CONCLUSIONS: While many operative trauma courses have been described, most are not directly relatable to LMICs. Barriers include cost-prohibitive fees, lack of resources, limited data collection, and contextual variability that renders certain surgical care inappropriate in LMICs. Gaps exist in standardization of course content as well as transparency of credentialing and course implementation strategies. These issues can be addressed through developing an open-access operative trauma course for low-resource settings.

Ethics of Educating American Global Surgeons: An Approach to Conscientious Training on the Individual, Departmental, and Institutional Levels.

Global surgery is a medical field dedicated to the facilitation of timely access to safe, affordable, and high-quality surgical healthcare worldwide, including support for necessary surgery and anesthesia infrastructure. Standard surgical training in the US does not provide necessary exposure to the range of surgical operations and nontechnical skills critical to practice in resource-limited contexts. Therefore, academic medical institutions have sought to bridge this training gap by establishing global surgery-focused rotations, fellowships, and integrated global surgery residencies. However, the presence of trainees pursuing education for careers in resource-variable settings presents an added layer of ethical complexity that must be carefully considered on the individual, programmatic, and institutional level. This article reviews the complexities relevant to global surgery trainees across these levels and offers potential mechanisms for addressing these ethical challenges.

The Development and Inclusion of Questions on Surgery in the 2018 Zambia Demographic and Health Survey.

BACKGROUND: While primary data on the unmet need for surgery in low- and middle-income countries is lacking, household surveys could provide an entry point to collect such data. We describe the first development and inclusion of questions on surgery in a nationally representative Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) in Zambia. METHOD: Questions regarding surgical conditions were developed through an iterative consultative process and integrated into the rollout of the DHS survey in Zambia in 2018 and administered to a nationwide sample survey of eligible women aged 15-49 years and men aged 15-59 years. RESULTS: In total, 7 questions covering 4 themes of service delivery, diagnosed burden of surgical disease, access to care, and quality of care were added. The questions were administered across 12,831 households (13,683 women aged 15-49 years and 12,132 men aged 15-59 years). Results showed that approximately 5% of women and 2% of men had undergone an operation in the past 5 years. Among women, cesarean delivery was the most common surgery; circumcision was the most common procedure among men. In the past 5 years, an estimated 0.61% of the population had been told by a health care worker that they might need surgery, and of this group, 35% had undergone the relevant procedure. CONCLUSION: For the first time, questions on surgery have been included in a nationwide DHS. We have shown that it is feasible to integrate these questions into a large-scale survey to provide insight into surgical needs at a national level. Based on the DHS design and implementation mechanisms, a country interested in including a set of questions like the one included in Zambia, could replicate this data collection in other settings, which provides an opportunity for systematic collection of comparable surgical data, a vital role in surgical health care system strengthening.

Global surgery, obstetric, and anaesthesia indicator definitions and reporting: An Utstein consensus report.

BACKGROUND: Indicators to evaluate progress towards timely access to safe surgical, anaesthesia, and obstetric (SAO) care were proposed in 2015 by the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery. These aimed to capture access to surgery, surgical workforce, surgical volume, perioperative mortality rate, and catastrophic and impoverishing financial consequences of surgery. Despite being rapidly taken up by practitioners, data points from which to derive the indicators were not defined, limiting comparability across time or settings. We convened global experts to evaluate and explicitly define-for the first time-the indicators to improve comparability and support achievement of 2030 goals to improve access to safe affordable surgical and anaesthesia care globally. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The Utstein process for developing and reporting guidelines through a consensus building process was followed. In-person discussions at a 2-day meeting were followed by an iterative process conducted by email and virtual group meetings until consensus was reached. The meeting was held between June 16 to 18, 2019; discussions continued until August 2020. Participants consisted of experts in surgery, anaesthesia, and obstetric care, data science, and health indicators from high-, middle-, and low-income countries. Considering each of the 6 indicators in turn, we refined overarching descriptions and agreed upon data points needed for construction of each indicator at current time (basic data points), and as each evolves over 2 to 5 (intermediate) and >5 year (full) time frames. We removed one of the original 6 indicators (one of 2 financial risk protection indicators was eliminated) and refined descriptions and defined data points required to construct the 5 remaining indicators: geospatial access, workforce, surgical volume, perioperative mortality, and catastrophic expenditure. A strength of the process was the number of people from global institutes and multilateral agencies involved in the collection and reporting of global health metrics; a limitation was the limited number of participants from low- or middle-income countries-who only made up 21% of the total attendees. CONCLUSIONS: To track global progress towards timely access to quality SAO care, these indicators-at the basic level-should be implemented universally as soon as possible. Intermediate and full indicator sets should be achieved by all countries over time. Meanwhile, these evolutions can assist in the short term in developing national surgical plans and collecting more detailed data for research studies.

Emergency and essential surgical healthcare services during COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries: A perspective.

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in significant changes in health care systems worldwide, with low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) sustaining important repercussions. Specifically, alongside cancellation and postponements of non-essential surgical services, emergency and essential surgical care delivery may become affected due to the shift of human and material resources towards fighting the pandemic. For surgeries that do get carried through, new difficulties arise in protecting surgical personnel from contracting SARS-CoV-2. This scarcity in LMIC surgical ecosystems may result in higher morbidity and mortality, in addition to the COVID-19 toll. This paper aims to explore the potential consequences of COVID-19 on the emergency and essential surgical care in LMICs, to offer recommendations to mitigate damages and to reflect on preparedness for future crises. Reducing the devastating consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on LMIC emergency and essential surgical services can be achieved through empowering communities with accurate information and knowledge on prevention, optimizing surgical material resources, providing quality training of health care personnel to treat SARS-CoV-2, and ensuring adequate personal protection equipment for workers on the frontline. While LMIC health systems are under larger strain, the experience from previous outbreaks may aid in order to innovate and adapt to the current pandemic. Protecting LMIC surgical ecosystems will be a pivotal process in ensuring that previous health system strengthening efforts are preserved, comprehensive care for populations worldwide are ensured, and to allow for future developments beyond the pandemic.

Globalization of national surgical, obstetric and anesthesia plans: the critical link between health policy and action in global surgery.

Efforts from the developed world to improve surgical, anesthesia and obstetric care in low- and middle-income countries have evolved from a primarily volunteer mission trip model to a sustainable health system strengthening approach as private and public stakeholders recognize the enormous health toll and financial burden of surgical disease. The National Surgical, Obstetric and Anesthesia Plan (NSOAP) has been developed as a policy strategy for countries to address, in part, the health burden of diseases amenable to surgical care, but these plans have not developed in isolation. The NSOAP has become a phenomenon of globalization as a broad range of partners - individuals and institutions - help in both NSOAP formulation, implementation and financing. As the nexus between policy and action in the field of global surgery, the NSOAP reflects a special commitment by state actors to make progress on global goals such as Universal Health Coverage and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. This requires a continued global commitment involving genuine partnerships that embrace the collective strengths of both national and global actors to deliver sustained, safe and affordable high-quality surgical care for all poor, rural and marginalized people.

Universal Access to Surgical Care and Sustainable Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Case for Surgical Systems Research Comment on "Global Surgery - Informing National Strategies for Scaling Up Surgery in Sub-Saharan Africa".

National level experiences, lessons learnt from the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) era coupled with the academic evidence and proposals generated by the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery (LCoGS) together with the economic arguments and recommendations from the World Bank Group's "Essential Surgery" Disease Control Priorities (DCP3) publication, provided the impetus for political commitments to improve surgical care capacity at the primary level of the healthcare system in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) as part of their drive towards universal health coverage (UHC) in the form of World Health Organization (WHO) Resolution A68.15. This global commitment from governments must be followed up with development of a Global Action Plan and a global coordination mechanism supported by regional implementation frameworks on the part of the WHO in order for the organisation to better coordinate all stakeholders and sustain the technical support needed to develop and implement national surgical health policy in the form of National Surgical Obstetric and Anaesthesia Plans (NSOAPs). As expounded by Gajewski et al, data and research output on surgical care is essential to informing policy development and programme implementation. This area still remains a challenge in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) but it is envisaged that countries will include this key component in their ongoing national surgical healthcare policy development and programme implementation. In the Zambian case study, research in the area of Global Surgery investment-the surgical workforce scale-up is used to demonstrate the important role of implementation research in the development and implementation of the Zambian NSOAP as well as the need for international collaborations to this end. Scale-up reviews informed by implementation research to evaluate progress on the commitments contained in Resolution A68.15 and Decision A70.22 are essential to sustain the momentum and to help maintain focus on the gaps in all countries. There are opportunities for non-state actors especially local sub-regional academic institutions, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and private sector to play a key role in surgical healthcare policy development and implementation research. Collection of and better information management of standardised surgical care indicators is essential for such research, for bi-annual WHO progress reporting and for demonstration of impact to justify and encourage further investments in surgical care.

The need to collect, aggregate, and analyze global anesthesia and surgery data.

In the Sustainable Development Goals era, there is a new awareness of the need for an integrated approach to healthcare interventions and a strong commitment to Universal Health Coverage. To achieve the goal of strengthening entire health systems, surgery, as a crosscutting treatment modality, is indispensable. For any health system strengthening exercise, baseline data and longitudinal monitoring of progress are necessary. With improved data capabilities, there are unparalleled possibilities to map out and understand systems, integrating data from many sources and sectors. Nevertheless, there is also a need to prioritize among indicators to avoid information overload and data collection fatigue. There is a similar need to define indicators and collection methodology to create standardized and comparable data. Finally, there is a need to establish data pathways to ensure clear responsibilities amongst national and international institutions and integrate surgical metrics into existing mechanisms for sustainable data collection. This is a call to collect, aggregate, and analyze global anesthesia and surgery data, with an account of existing data sources and a proposed way forward.

RéSUMé: À l'époque des objectifs du développement durable, on constate une nouvelle sensibilisation au besoin d'une approche intégrée dans les interventions en soins de santé et un fort engagement en faveur d'une couverture médicale universelle. Pour atteindre l'objectif du renforcement de systèmes entiers de santé, la chirurgie en tant que modalité thérapeutique transversale est indispensable. Pour toute activité de renforcement du système de santé, des données de référence et un suivi longitudinal des progrès sont nécessaires. Avec de meilleures données, il existe des possibilités sans équivalent de cartographier et de comprendre les systèmes, en intégrant des données provenant de multiples sources et secteurs. Néanmoins, il est également nécessaire de prioriser les indicateurs pour éviter une surcharge d'informations et une fatigue dans la collecte des données. Il existe un besoin similaire de définition des indicateurs et de la méthodologie de collecte afin de créer des données standardisées et comparables. Enfin, il est nécessaire d'établir des cheminements de données pour garantir des responsabilités claires entre les institutions nationales et internationales et intégrer les paramètres chirurgicaux dans les mécanismes existants pour une collecte durable des données. Ceci est un appel à la collecte, au regroupement et à l'analyse de données globales en anesthésie et en chirurgie avec un compte rendu des sources de données existantes et une proposition d'avancée.