Health system assessment for access to care after injury in low- or middle-income countries: A mixed methods study from Northern Malawi.

BACKGROUND: Injuries represent a vast and relatively neglected burden of disease affecting low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While many health systems underperform in treating injured patients, most assessments have not considered the whole system. We integrated findings from 9 methods using a 3 delays approach (delays in seeking, reaching, or receiving care) to prioritise important trauma care health system barriers in Karonga, Northern Malawi, and exemplify a holistic health system assessment approach applicable in comparable settings. METHODS AND FINDINGS: To provide multiple perspectives on each conceptual delay and include data from community-based and facility-based sources, we used 9 methods to examine the injury care health system. The methods were (1) household survey; (2) verbal autopsy analysis; (3) community focus group discussions (FGDs); (4) community photovoice; (5) facility care-pathway process mapping and elucidation of barriers following injury; (6) facility healthcare worker survey; (7) facility assessment survey; (8) clinical vignettes for care process quality assessment of facility-based healthcare workers; and (9) geographic information system (GIS) analysis. Empirical data collection took place in Karonga, Northern Malawi, between July 2019 and February 2020. We used a convergent parallel study design concurrently conducting all data collection before subsequently integrating results for interpretation. For each delay, a matrix was created to juxtapose method-specific data relevant to each barrier identified as driving delays to injury care. Using a consensus approach, we graded the evidence from each method as to whether an identified barrier was important within the health system. We identified 26 barriers to access timely quality injury care evidenced by at least 3 of the 9 study methods. There were 10 barriers at delay 1, 6 at delay 2, and 10 at delay 3. We found that the barriers "cost," "transport," and "physical resources" had the most methods providing strong evidence they were important health system barriers within delays 1 (seeking care), 2 (reaching care), and 3 (receiving care), respectively. Facility process mapping provided evidence for the greatest number of barriers-25 of 26 within the integrated analysis. There were some barriers with notable divergent findings between the community- and facility-based methods, as well as among different community- and facility-based methods, which are discussed. The main limitation of our study is that the framework for grading evidence strength for important health system barriers across the 9 studies was done by author-derived consensus; other researchers might have created a different framework. CONCLUSIONS: By integrating 9 different methods, including qualitative, quantitative, community-, patient-, and healthcare worker-derived data sources, we gained a rich insight into the functioning of this health system's ability to provide injury care. This approach allowed more holistic appraisal of this health system's issues by establishing convergence of evidence across the diverse methods used that the barriers of cost, transport, and physical resources were the most important health system barriers driving delays to seeking, reaching, and receiving injury care, respectively. This offers direction and confidence, over and above that derived from single methodology studies, for prioritising barriers to address through health service development and policy.

The impact of the increasing burden of trauma in Malawi on orthopedic trauma service priorities at Kamuzu Central Hospital.

Background and purpose - The burden of road traffic injuries globally is rising rapidly, and has a huge effect on health systems and development in low- and middle-income countries. Malawi is a small low-income country in southeastern Africa with a population of 16.7 million and a gross national income per capita of only 250 USD. The impact of the rising burden of trauma is very apparent to healthcare workers on the ground, but there are very few data showing this development. Patients and methods - The annual number of femoral fracture patients admitted to Kamuzu Central Hospital (KCH) in the Capital of Malawi, Lilongwe, from 2009 to 2014 was retrieved from the KCH trauma database. Linear regression curve estimation was used to project the growth in the burden of femoral fractures and the number of operations performed for femoral fractures over the same time period. Results - 992 patients with femoral fractures (26% of all admissions for fractures) presented at KCH from 2009 through 2014. In this period, there was a 132% increase in the annual number of femoral fractures admitted to KCH. In the same time period, the total number of operations more than doubled, but there was no increase in the number of operations performed for femoral fractures. Overall, there was a 7% mortality rate for patients with femoral fractures. Interpretation - The burden of femoral fractures in Malawi is rising rapidly, and the surgical resources available cannot keep up with this development. Limited funds for orthopedic trauma care in Malawi should be invested in central training hospitals, to develop a sustainable number of orthopedic surgeons and improve current infrastructure and equipment. The centralization of orthopedic surgical care delivery at the central training hospitals will lead to better access to surgical care and early return of patients to local district hospitals for rehabilitation, thus increasing surgical throughput and efficiency in a more cost-effective manner, with the goal of expanding the future orthopedic surgical workforce to meet the national need.

Identifying and prioritising barriers to injury care in Northern Malawi, results of a multifacility multidisciplinary health facility staff survey.

INTRODUCTION: The burden of injuries globally and in Malawi is substantial. Optimising both access to, and quality of, care in health systems requires attention. We aimed to establish how health facility staff in Karonga, Malawi, perceive barriers to seeking (delay 1), reaching (delay 2) and receiving (delay 3) injury care. METHOD: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of health facility staff who treat patients with injuries in all health facilities serving the Karonga Demographic Surveillance Site population. The primary outcome was participant perceptions of the importance of delays 1 to 3 following injury. Secondary outcomes were the barriers within each of these delays considered most important and which were considered the most important across all delays stages. RESULTS: 228 staff completed the survey: 36.8% (84/228) were female and 61.4% (140/228) reported being involved in caring for an injured person at least weekly. Delay 3 was most frequently considered the most important delay 35.1% (80/228), with 19.3% (44/228) and 16.6% (38/228) reporting delays 1 and 2 as the most important respectively; 28.9% (66/228) of respondents either did not know or answer. For delay 1 the barrier, "the perceived financial costs associated with seeking care are too great", was considered most important. For delay 2, the barrier "lack of timely affordable emergency transport (formal or informal)" was considered most important. For delay 3, the barrier, "lack of reliably available necessary physical resources (infrastructure, equipment and consumable material)" was considered most important. When considering the most important overall barrier across all delays, the delay 3 barrier, "lack of reliably available necessary physical resources" received the most nominations (41.7% [95/228]). CONCLUSIONS: Given the awareness of health facility staff of the issues facing their patients, these findings should assist in informing health system planning.

The economic costs of orthopaedic services: a health system cost analysis of tertiary hospitals in a low-income country.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic injuries are rising globally, disproportionately affecting low- and middle-income countries, constituting 88% of the burden of surgically treatable conditions. While contributing to the highest burden, LMICs also have the least availability of resources to address this growing burden effectively. Studies on the cost-of-service provision in these settings have concentrated on the most common traumatic injuries, leaving an evidence gap on other traumatic injuries. This study aimed to address the gap in understanding the cost of orthopaedic services in low-income settings by conducting a comprehensive costing analysis in two tertiary-level hospitals in Malawi. METHODS: We used a mixed costing methodology, utilising both Top-Down and Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing approaches. Data on resource utilisation, personnel costs, medicines, supplies, capital costs, laboratory costs, radiology service costs, and overhead costs were collected for one year, from July 2021 to June 2022. We conducted a retrospective review of all the available patient files for the period under review. Assumptions on the intensity of service use were based on utilisation patterns observed in patient records. All costs were expressed in 2021 United States Dollars. RESULTS: We conducted a review of 2,372 patient files, 72% of which were male. The median length of stay for all patients was 9.5 days (8-11). The mean weighted cost of treatment across the entire pathway varied, ranging from $195 ($136-$235) for Supracondylar Fractures to $711 ($389-$931) for Proximal Ulna Fractures. The main cost components were personnel (30%) and medicines and supplies (23%). Within diagnosis-specific costs, the length of stay was the most significant cost driver, contributing to the substantial disparity in treatment costs between the two hospitals. CONCLUSION: This study underscores the critical role of orthopaedic care in LMICs and the need for context-specific cost data. It highlights the variation in cost drivers and resource utilisation patterns between hospitals, emphasising the importance of tailored healthcare planning and resource allocation approaches. Understanding the costs of surgical interventions in LMICs can inform policy decisions and improve access to essential orthopaedic services, potentially reducing the disease burden associated with trauma-related injuries. We recommend that future studies focus on evaluating the cost-effectiveness of orthopaedic interventions, particularly those that have not been analysed within the existing literature.

Complications after intramedullary nailing of femoral fractures in a low-income country.

BACKGROUND: Some surgeons believe that internal fixation of fractures carries too high a risk of infection in low-income countries (LICs) to merit its use there. However, there have been too few studies from LICs with sufficient follow-up to support this belief. We first wanted to determine whether complete follow-up could be achieved in an LIC, and secondly, we wanted to find the true microbial infection rate at our hospital and to examine the influence of HIV infection and lack of follow-up on outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 137 patients with 141 femoral fractures that were treated with intramedullary (IM) nailing were included. We compared outcomes in patients who returned for scheduled follow-up and patients who did not return but who could be contacted by phone or visited in their home village. RESULTS: 79 patients returned for follow-up as scheduled; 29 of the remaining patients were reached by phone or outreach visits, giving a total follow-up rate of 79%. 7 patients (5%) had a deep postoperative infection. All of them returned for scheduled follow-up. There were no infections in patients who did not return for follow-up, as compared to 8 of 83 nails in the group that did return as scheduled (p = 0.1). 2 deaths occurred in HIV-positive patients (2/23), while no HIV-negative patients (0/105) died less than 30 days after surgery (p = 0.03). INTERPRETATION: We found an acceptable infection rate. The risk of infection should not be used as an argument against IM nailing of femoral fractures in LICs. Many patients in Malawi did not return for follow-up because they had no complaints concerning the fracture. There was an increased postoperative mortality rate in HIV-positive patients.

Novel application of multi-facility process map analysis for rapid injury care health system assessment in Northern Malawi.

OBJECTIVES: We used the process mapping method and Three Delays framework, to identify and visually represent the relationship between critical actions, decisions and barriers to access to care following injury in the Karonga health system, Northern Malawi. DESIGN: Facilitated group process mapping workshops with summary process mapping synthesis. SETTING: Process mapping workshops took place in 11 identified health system facilities (one per facility) providing injury care for a population in Karonga, Northern Malawi. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-four healthcare workers from various cadres took part. RESULTS: An overall injury health system summary map was created using those categories of action, decision and barrier that were sometimes or frequently reported. This provided a visual summary of the process following injury within the health system. For Delay 1 (seeking care) four barriers were most commonly described (by 8 of 11 facilities) these were 'cultural norms', 'healthcare literacy', 'traditional healers' and 'police processes'. For Delay 2 (reaching care) the barrier most frequently described was 'transport'-a lack of timely affordable emergency transport (formal or informal) described by all 11 facilities. For Delay 3 (receiving quality care) the most commonly reported barrier was that of 'physical resources' (9 of 11 facilities). CONCLUSIONS: We found our novel approach combining several process mapping exercises to produce a summary map to be highly suited to rapid health system assessment identifying barriers to injury care, within a Three Delays framework. We commend the approach to others wishing to conduct rapid health system assessments in similar contexts.

Development and use of clinical vignettes to assess injury care quality in Northern Malawi.

BACKGROUND: It is known that outcomes after injury care in low-and-middle income countries (LMICs) are poorer than those in high income countries. However, little is known about healthcare provider competency to deliver quality injury care in these settings. We developed and used clinical vignettes to evaluate injury care quality in an LMIC setting. METHOD: Four serious injury scenarios, developed from agreed best practice, testing diagnostic and management skills, were piloted with high and low-income setting clinicians. Scenarios were used with primary and referral facility clinicians in Malawi. Participants described their clinical course of action (assessment, diagnostic, treatment and management approaches) for each scenario, registering one point per agreed best practice response. Mean percentage total scores were calculated and univariable and multivariable comparison made across provider groups, facility types, injury care frequency and training level. RESULTS: Fourteen Doctors, 51 Clinical Officers, 20 Medical Assistants from 11 facilities participated. Mean percentage total vignette scores varied significantly with clinician provider group (Doctors 63.1% vs Clinical Officers 49.6%, p<0.001, Clinical Officers vs Medical Assistants 39.4% p=0.001). Important care aspects most frequently included or omitted were: following chest injury, 88.2% reported chest drain insertion, 7.1% checked for tracheal deviation; following penetrating abdominal injury and shock, 98.8% secured IV access, 0% mentioned tranexamic acid; following severe head injury, 88.2% proposed CT or neurosurgical transfer, 7.1% ensured normotension; and following isolated open lower leg fracture, 90.1% arranged orthopaedic consultation, 2.4% assessed distal neurological status. CONCLUSION: These clinical vignettes proved easy to use and collected rich data. This supports their use for assessing and monitoring clinical care quality in other similar settings.