Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
BMC Health Serv Res ; 21(1): 943, 2021 Sep 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34503503


BACKGROUND: The Gambia has one of the lowest survival rates for breast cancer in Africa. Contributing factors are late presentation, delays within the healthcare system, and decreased availability of resources. We aimed to characterize the capacity and geographic location of healthcare facilities in the country and calculate the proportion of the population with access to breast cancer care. METHODS: A facility-based assessment tool was administered to secondary and tertiary healthcare facilities and private medical centers and clinics in The Gambia. GPS coordinates were obtained, and proximity of service availability and population analysis were performed. Distance thresholds of 10, 20, and 45 km were chosen to determine access to screening, pathologic diagnosis, and surgical management. An additional population analysis was performed to observe the potential impact of targeted development of resources for breast cancer care. RESULTS: All 102 secondary and tertiary healthcare facilities and private medical centers and clinics in The Gambia were included. Breast cancer screening is mainly performed through clinical breast examination and is available in 52 facilities. Seven facilities provide pathologic diagnosis and surgical management of breast cancer. The proportion of the Gambian population with access to screening, pathologic diagnosis, and surgical management is 72, 53, and 62%, respectively. A hypothetical targeted expansion of resources would increase the covered population to 95, 62, and 84%. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of the Gambian population does not have access to pathologic diagnosis and surgical management of breast cancer within the distance threshold utilized in the study. Mapping and population analysis can identify areas for targeted development of resources to increase access to breast cancer care.

Neoplasias da Mama , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Neoplasias da Mama/terapia , Estudos Transversais , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Feminino , Gâmbia/epidemiologia , Acesso aos Serviços de Saúde , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento
J Surg Res ; 229: 186-191, 2018 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29936988


BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the standard of care for biliary disease in developed countries. LC in resource-limited countries is increasing. This prospective, observational study evaluates costs, outcomes, and quality of life (QoL) associated with laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy (OC) in Mongolia. METHODS: Patient demographics, outcomes, and total payer and patient costs were elicited from a convenience sample of patients undergoing cholecystectomy at four urban and three rural hospitals (February 2016-January 2017). QoL was assessed preoperatively and postoperatively using the five-level EQ-5D instrument. Perioperative complications, surgical fees, and QoL scores were evaluated for LC versus OC. Multivariate regression models were generated to adjust for differences between these groups. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifteen cholecystectomies were included (LC 122, OC 93). LC patients were more likely to have attended college and have insurance. Preoperative symptoms were comparable between groups. Total complication rate was 21.8% (no difference between groups); LC patients had less superficial infections (0% versus 10.8%). Median hospital length of stay (HLOS) and days to return to work were shorter after LC. QoL improved after surgery for both groups. Mean total payer and patient costs were higher for LC, but not significant (P-value 0.126). After adjustment, LC had significantly less complications, shorter HLOS, fewer days to return to work, greater improvement in QoL scores, and no increase in cost. CONCLUSIONS: LC is safe and beneficial to patients with biliary disease in Mongolia, and cost effective from the patient's and payer's perspective. Although equipment costs for LC may be more expensive than OC, there are likely significant cost savings related to reduced HLOS, shorter time off work, fewer complications, and improved QoL.

Doenças Biliares/cirurgia , Colecistectomia Laparoscópica/economia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Período Perioperatório/economia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Adulto , Doenças Biliares/economia , Colecistectomia Laparoscópica/efeitos adversos , Colecistectomia Laparoscópica/métodos , Redução de Custos/economia , Redução de Custos/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Gastos em Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Tempo de Internação/economia , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mongólia/epidemiologia , Duração da Cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/economia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Qualidade de Vida , Fatores de Tempo