RESUMO
PURPOSE: Lack of access to safe and affordable anesthesia and monitoring equipment may contribute to higher rates of morbidity and mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While capnography is standard in high-income countries, use in LMICs is not well studied. We evaluated the association of capnography use with patient and procedure-related characteristics, as well as the association of capnography use and mortality in a cohort of patients from Kenya and Ethiopia. METHODS: For this retrospective observational study, we used historical cohort data from Kenya and Ethiopia from 2014 to 2020. Logistic regression was used to study the association of capnography use (primary outcome) with patient/procedure factors, and the adjusted association of intraoperative, 24-hr, and seven-day mortality (secondary outcomes) with capnography use. RESULTS: A total of 61,792 anesthetic cases were included in this study. Tertiary or secondary hospital type (compared with primary) was strongly associated with use of capnography (odds ratio [OR], 6.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.67 to 6.93 and OR, 6.88; 95% CI, 6.40 to 7.40, respectively), as was general (vs regional) anesthesia (OR, 4.83; 95% CI, 4.41 to 5.28). Capnography use was significantly associated with lower odds of intraoperative mortality in patients who underwent general anesthesia (OR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.48). Nevertheless, fully-adjusted models for 24-hr and seven-day mortality showed no evidence of association with capnography. CONCLUSION: Capnography use in LMICs is substantially lower compared with other standard anesthesia monitors. Capnography was used at higher rates in tertiary centres and with patients undergoing general anesthesia. While this study revealed decreased odds of intraoperative mortality with capnography use, further studies need to confirm these findings.
RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Le manque d'accès à des équipements d'anesthésie et de monitorage sécuritaires et abordables peut contribuer à des taux plus élevés de morbidité et de mortalité dans les pays à revenu faible et intermédiaire (PRFI). Alors que la capnographie est une modalité standard dans les pays à revenu élevé, son utilisation dans les PRFI n'est pas bien étudiée. Nous avons évalué l'association de l'utilisation de la capnographie avec les caractéristiques des patient·es et des interventions, ainsi que l'association de l'utilisation de la capnographie et de la mortalité dans une cohorte de patient·es du Kenya et d'Éthiopie. MéTHODE: Pour cette étude observationnelle rétrospective, nous avons utilisé des données de cohortes historiques du Kenya et de l'Éthiopie de 2014 à 2020. Une régression logistique a été utilisée pour étudier l'association entre l'utilisation de la capnographie (critère d'évaluation principal) et les facteurs patient·es/interventions, ainsi que pour étudier l'association ajustée entre la mortalité peropératoire, à 24 h et à sept jours (critères d'évaluation secondaires) et l'utilisation de la capnographie. RéSULTATS: Au total, 61 792 cas d'anesthésie ont été inclus dans cette étude. Le type d'hôpital tertiaire ou secondaire (par rapport à un établissement primaire) était fortement associé à l'utilisation de la capnographie (rapport de cotes [RC], 6,27; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 5,67 à 6,93 et RC, 6,88; IC 95 %, 6,40 à 7,40, respectivement), tout comme l'était l'anesthésie générale (vs régionale) (RC, 4,83; IC 95 %, 4,41 à 5,28). L'utilisation de la capnographie était significativement associée à une probabilité plus faible de mortalité peropératoire chez les patient·es ayant reçu une anesthésie générale (RC, 0,31; IC 95 %, 0,17 à 0,48). Néanmoins, les modèles entièrement ajustés pour la mortalité à 24 heures et à sept jours n'ont montré aucune donnée probante d'association avec la capnographie. CONCLUSION: L'utilisation de la capnographie dans les PRFI est considérablement moins répandue que celle d'autres moniteurs d'anesthésie standard. La capnographie a été utilisée à des taux plus élevés dans les centres tertiaires et chez des patient·es sous anesthésie générale. Bien que cette étude ait révélé une diminution de la probabilité de mortalité peropératoire avec l'utilisation de la capnographie, d'autres études doivent confirmer ces résultats.
Assuntos
Anestesia por Condução , Capnografia , Humanos , Capnografia/métodos , Etiópia , Quênia , Anestesia GeralRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Limited data exist concerning how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected surgical care in low-resource settings. We sought to describe associations between the COVID-19 pandemic and surgical care and outcomes at 2 tertiary hospitals in Ethiopia. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study analyzing perioperative data collected electronically from Ayder Comprehensive Specialized Hospital (ACSH) in Mekelle, Ethiopia, and Tibebe Ghion Specialized Hospital (TGSH) in Bahir Dar, Ethiopia. We categorized COVID-19 exposure as time periods: "phase 0" before the pandemic (November 1-December 31, 2019, at ACSH and August 1-September 30, 2019, at TGSH), "phase 1" starting when elective surgeries were canceled (April 1-August 3, 2020, at ACSH and March 28-April 12, 2020, at TGSH), and "phase 2" starting when elective surgeries resumed (August 4-August 31, 2020, at ACSH and April 13-August 31, 2020, at TGSH). Outcomes included 28-day perioperative mortality, case volume, and patient district of origin. Incidence rates of case volume and patient district of origin (outside district yes or no) were modeled with segmented Poisson regression and logistic regression, respectively. Association of the exposure with 28-day mortality was assessed using logistic regression models, adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: Data from 3231 surgeries were captured. There was a decrease in case volume compared to phase 0, with adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-0.81) in phase 1 and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.83-0.97) in phase 2. Compared to phase 0, there were more patients from an outside district during phase 1 lockdown at ACSH (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.63 [95% CI, 1.24-2.15]) and fewer patients from outside districts at TGSH (aOR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.21-0.87]). The observed 28-day mortality rates for phases 0, 1, and 2 were 1.8% (95% CI, 1.1-2.8), 3.7% (95% CI, 2.3-5.8), and 2.9% (95% CI, 2.1-3.9), respectively. A confounder-adjusted logistic regression model did not show a significant increase in 28-day perioperative mortality during phases 1 and 2 compared to phase 0, with aOR 1.36 (95% CI, 0.62-2.98) and 1.54 (95% CI, 0.80-2.95), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis at 2 low-resource referral hospitals in Ethiopia during the COVID-19 pandemic showed a reduction in surgical case volume during and after lockdown. At ACSH, more patients were from outside districts during lockdown where the opposite was true at TGSH. These findings suggest that during the pandemic patients may experience delays in seeking or obtaining surgical care. However, for patients who underwent surgery, prepandemic and postpandemic perioperative mortalities did not show significant difference. These results may inform surgical plans during future public health crises.
