Procedures, Equipment, And Supplies Research Articles

Assessment of surgical care capacity at non-tertiary hospitals in Botswana

Background: Most low- and middle-income communities (LMICs) live in rural areas and are served mainly by primary and district hospitals. This study seeks to geographically map these hospitals and measure their surgical care capacity in Botswana. Methods: This 3-month cross-sectional observational study was conducted at the Department of Surgery, University of Botswana. Google Map was used to map hospitals geographically. The PIPES (personnel, infrastructure, procedures, equipment, and supplies) tool was used to assess the surgical care capacity of hospitals. This tool was developed by Surgeons Overseas to quantify surgical capacity in low-resource settings. Consent was obtained. Results: Nine districts and ten primary hospitals were assessed. The distance from settlements to the nearest healthcare facility in sparsely populated areas was relatively larger, making timely healthcare access potentially problematic. Intensive care services were unavailable except at three hospitals. None of the hospitals had full blood bank services. X-ray and ultrasound machines and basic supplies were available at over 90% of the hospitals. Conclusion: There was a general lack of surgical care specialists. Hospitals with a full complement of surgical care specialists had relatively higher PIPES indices. We recommend investing in deploying specialized surgical care providers to primary and district hospitals.

Surgical and Trauma Capacity Assessment in Rural Haryana, India.

Background:Trauma is a major global health problem and majority of the deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), at even higher rates in the rural areas. The three-delay model assesses three different delays in accessing healthcare and can be applied to improve surgical and trauma healthcare delivery. Prior to implementing change, the capacities of the rural India healthcare system need to be identified.Objective:The object of this study was to estimate surgical and trauma care capacities of government health facilities in rural Nanakpur, Haryana, India using the Personnel, Infrastructure, Procedures, Equipment and Supplies (PIPES) and International Assessment of Capacity for Trauma (INTACT) tools.Methods:The PIPES and INTACT tools were administered at eight government health facilities serving the population of Nanakpur in June 2015. Data analysis was performed per tool subsection, and an overall score was calculated. Higher PIPES or INTACT indices correspond to greater surgical or trauma care capacity, respectively.Findings:Surgical and trauma care capacities increased with higher levels of care. The median PIPES score was significantly higher for tertiary facilities than primary and secondary facilities [13.8 (IQR 9.5, 18.2) vs. 4.7 (IQR 3.9, 6.2), p = 0.03]. The lower-level facilities were mainly lacking in personnel and procedures.Conclusions:Surgical and trauma care capacities at healthcare facilities in Haryana, India demonstrate a shortage of surgical resources at lower-level centers. Specifically, the Primary Health Centers were not operating at full capacity. These results can inform resource allocation, including increasing education, across different facility levels in rural India.

Anesthesia Capacity of District-Level Hospitals in Malawi, Tanzania, and Zambia: A Mixed-Methods Study.

District-level hospitals (DLHs) are the main providers of surgical services for rural populations in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Skilled teams are essential for surgical care, and gaps in anesthesia impact negatively on surgical capacity and outcomes. This study, from a baseline of a project scaling-up access to safe surgical and anesthesia care in Malawi, Tanzania, and Zambia, illustrates the deficit of anesthesia care in DLHs. We undertook an in-depth investigation of anesthesia capacity in 76 DLHs across the 3 countries, July to November 2017, using a mixed-methods approach. The quantitative component assessed district-level anesthesia capacity using a standardized scoring system based on an adapted and extended Personnel, Infrastructure, Procedures, Equipment and Supplies (PIPES) Index. The qualitative component involved semistructured interviews with providers from 33 DLHs, exploring how weaknesses in anesthesia impacted district surgical team practices and quality, volume, and scope of service provision. Anesthesia care at the district level in these countries is provided only by nonphysician anesthetists, some of whom have no formal training. Ketamine anesthesia is widely used in all hospitals, compensating for shortages of other forms of anesthesia. Pediatric size supplies/equipment were frequently missing. Anesthesia PIPES index scores in Malawi (M = 8.0), Zambia (M = 8.3), and Tanzania (M = 8.4) were similar (P = .59), but an analysis of individual PIPES components revealed important cross-country differences. Irregular availability of reliable equipment and supply is a particular priority in Malawi, where only 29% of facilities have uninterrupted access to electricity and 23% have constant access to water, among other challenges. Zambia is mostly affected by staffing shortages, with 30% of surveyed hospitals lacking an anesthesia provider. The challenge that stood out in Tanzania was nonavailability of functioning anesthesia machines among frequent shortages of staff and other equipment. Tanzania, Malawi, and Zambia are falling far short of ensuring universal access to safe and affordable surgical and anesthesia care for district and rural populations. Mixed-methods situation analyses, undertaken in collaboration with anesthesia specialists-measuring and understanding deficits in district hospital anesthetic staff, equipment, and supplies-are needed to address the critical neglect of anesthesia that is essential to providing surgical responses to the needs of rural populations in SSA.

Geospatial Analysis of Trauma Burden and Surgical Care Capacity in Teso Sub-region of Eastern Uganda.

Over 90% of injury-related deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries. Relating spatial distribution of injury burden and trauma care capacity is crucial for effective resource allocation. Our study assesses trauma burden and emergency and essential surgical care (EESC) quality in Teso Sub-region Eastern Uganda through a spatial analysis of trauma burden in relation to surgical capacity at the district level. In this study, we surveyed trauma patients presenting at Soroti Regional Referral Hospital (SRRH) and assessed EESC capacity of district hospitals. We used geospatial techniques to relate trauma burden and capacity and characterized delay using the three-delay framework. We surveyed 131 trauma patients presenting to SRRH for trauma-related injuries from June 1 to July 15, 2017. Almost all trauma incidents (n = 129, 98.4%) occurred within a 2-h ideal drive time to SRRH. From time of injury to receiving care, median time totaled to approximately 9.25h. District hospital exhibited decreased EESC capacity (personnel, infrastructure, procedures, equipment, and supplies (PIPES) score range 2.2-5.5, mean 4.2) compared to SRRH (PIPES score 8.1). Trauma patients face delays in each step of the care-seeking process from deciding to seek care, arriving at care site, and receiving treatment. Synergistic effects of a poor prehospital care, EESC deficiencies on district and regional levels, cost of seeking care contribute to delays that likely result in increased morbidity and mortality. Improved resource allocation, training at the district level, and strengthening system-level organization of emergency medical services could avert preventable death and disability.

A Nationwide, Systematic, and Comprehensive Assessment of Surgical Capacity in Lebanon: Results of the Surgical Capacity in Areas With Refugees (SCAR) Study.

We sought to perform a systematic, comprehensive, and nationwide cross-sectional analysis of surgical capacity in Lebanon. Providing surgical care in refugee areas is increasingly recognized as a global health priority. The surgical capacity of Lebanon where at least 1 in 6 inhabitants is currently a refugee remains unknown. The Surgical Capacity in Areas with Refugees cross-sectional study included 3 steps: (1) geographically mapping all hospitals providing surgical care in Lebanon, (2) systematically assessing each hospital's surgical capacity, and (3) identifying surgical care gaps/disparities. First, a list of hospitals in Lebanon and their locations was generated combining data from the Lebanese Ministry of Health and Syndicate of Hospitals. Specialty, rehabilitation, and maternity facilities were excluded. Second, the validated 5 domain Personnel, Infrastructure, Procedures, Equipment, and Supplies (PIPES) tool was administered in each hospital through a face-to-face or phone interview. Hospitals' PIPES indices were computed; data were aggregated and analyzed for geographic and private/public disparities. A total of 129 hospitals were geographically mapped; 20% were public. The PIPES tool was administered in all hospitals (100%). The mean PIPES index was 10.98 (Personnel = 14.91, Infrastructure = 15.36, Procedures = 37.47, Equipment = 21.63, Supplies = 24.78). The number of hospital beds, operating rooms, surgeons, and anesthesiologists per 100,000 people were 217, 8, 16, and 9, respectively. Deficiencies in infrastructure were significant, whereby 62%, 36%, 16%, and 5% of hospitals lack incinerators, pretested blood, intensive care units, and computed tomography, respectively. Continuous external electricity was lacking in 16 hospitals (12%). Compared to private hospitals, public hospitals had a lower PIPES index (10.48 vs 11.1, P = 0.022), including lower Personnel and Infrastructure scores (12.31 vs 15.57, P = 0.03; 14.04 vs 15.7, P = 0.003, respectively). Geographically, the administrative governorates with highest refugee concentrations had the lowest PIPES indices. Evaluating surgical capacity in Lebanon reveals significant deficiencies, most pronounced in public hospitals in which refugee care is provided and in areas with the highest refugee concentration.

Refugee Access to Surgical Care in Lebanon: A Post Hoc Analysis of the SCAR Study

BackgroundLebanon hosts an estimated one million Syrian refugees registered with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The UNHCR contracts with select Lebanese hospitals to provide affordable primary and emergency care to refugees. We aimed to assess the surgical capabilities of UNHCR-affiliated hospitals in Lebanon. MethodsCross-sectional data from the Surgical Capacity in Areas with Refugees study were combined with hospital affiliation data obtained from the UNHCR. The Surgical Capacity in Areas with Refugees study evaluated surgical capacity in Lebanon by mapping all acute care hospitals and administering the five domain Personnel, Infrastructure, Procedures, Equipment, and Supplies (PIPES) tool to each hospital. Mean PIPES indices and mean numbers of hospital beds, surgeons, and anesthesiologists were compared between UNHCR-affiliated and nonaffiliated hospitals. Geographically, the distribution of UNHCR-affiliated hospitals was cross-referenced with refugee population distributions. ResultsOne hundred and twenty nine hospitals were included, 35 (27.1%) of which were affiliated with the UNHCR. The PIPES tool was administered across all hospitals. Mean PIPES indices and mean number of hospital beds, general surgeons, and anesthesiologists were similar between UNHCR-affiliated and nonaffiliated hospitals. Geographical mapping of hospitals and refugee populations across Lebanon revealed a disparity in the Northeastern region of the country: that region had the highest number of refugees but lacked sufficient UNHCR coverage. ConclusionsHospitals covered by the UNHCR performed similarly to nonaffiliated hospitals with respect to all aspects of the PIPES surgical capacity tool. However, there is a concerning geographic mismatch between UNHCR coverage and refugee density, specifically in the governorates of Akkar, Bekaa, and Baalbek-Hermel.

Pilot Use of a Novel Tool to Assess Neurosurgical Capacity in Uganda.

There is a significant burden of unmet surgical need in many low- and middle-income countries (>80% in parts of Africa). This need is even larger for specialties such as neurosurgery. Surgical capacity tools have been developed and used to assess needs and plan for resource allocation. This study piloted a new tool to assess neurosurgical capacity and describes its use. A surgical capacity tool was adapted to assess neurosurgical capacity. An expert panel of neurosurgeons and researchers reviewed the Surgeons OverSeas PIPES (personnel, infrastructure, procedures, equipment, and supplies) assessment and added additional items essential to perform common neurosurgery procedures. This tool was then piloted at 3 public hospitals in Uganda and each hospital was given a score of neurosurgical capacity. At 1 hospital, 3 respondents were asked to answer the survey to assess reliability. The hospital with the largest neurosurgery caseload and 5 neurosurgeons scored the highest on our survey, followed by a regional hospital with 1 practicing neurosurgeon. The third hospital, without a neurosurgeon, scored the lowest on the scale. At the hospital that completed the reliability assessment, scores were varied between respondents. NeuroPIPES survey scores were in keeping with the number of neurosurgeons and respective caseloads of each hospital. However, the variation in scores between respondents at the same hospital suggests that adaptations could be made to the tool that may improve reliability and validity. The methodology used to create NeuroPIPES may be successfully applied to a variety of other surgical subspecialties for similar assessments.

Assessment of Surgical and Trauma Capacity in Potosí, Bolivia

BackgroundScaling up surgical and trauma care in low- and middle-income countries could prevent nearly 2 million annual deaths. Various survey instruments exist to measure surgical and trauma capacity, including Personnel, Infrastructure, Procedures, Equipment, and Supplies (PIPES) and International Assessment of Capacity for Trauma (INTACT). ObjectiveWe sought to evaluate surgical and trauma capacity in the Bolivian department of Potosí using a combined PIPES and INTACT tool, with additional questions to further inform intervention targets. MethodsIn June and July 2014 a combined PIPES and INTACT survey was administered to 20 government facilities in Potosí with a minimum of 1 operating room: 2 third-level, 10 second-level, and 8 first-level facilities. A surgeon, head physician, director, or obstetrician-gynecologist completed the survey. Additional personnel responded to 4 short-answer questions. Survey items were divided into subsections, and PIPES and INTACT indices calculated. Medians were compared via Wilcoxon rank sum and Kruskal-Wallis tests. FindingsSix of 20 facilities were located in the capital city and designated urban. Urban establishments had higher median PIPES (8.5 vs 6.7, P = .11) and INTACT (8.5 vs 6.9, P = .16) indices compared with rural. More than half of surgeons and anesthesiologists worked in urban hospitals. Urban facilities had higher median infrastructure and procedure scores compared with rural. Fifty-three individuals completed short-answer questions. Training was most desired in laparoscopic surgery and trauma management; less than half of establishments reported staff with trauma training. ConclusionsSurgical and trauma capacity in Potosí was most limited in personnel, infrastructure, and procedures at rural facilities, with greater personnel deficiencies than previously reported. Interventions should focus on increasing the number of surgical and anesthesia personnel in rural areas, with a particular focus on the reported desire for trauma management training. Results have been made available to key stakeholders in Potosí to inform targeted quality improvement interventions.

Surgical and anaesthetic capacity of hospitals in Malawi: key insights.

Background Surgery is increasingly recognized as an important driver for health systems strengthening, especially in developing countries. To facilitate quality improvement initiatives, baseline knowledge of capacity for surgical, anaesthetic, emergency and obstetric care is critical. In partnership with the Malawi Ministry of Health, we quantified government hospitals’ surgical capacity through workforce, infrastructure and health service delivery components.Methods From November 2012 to January 2013, we surveyed district and mission hospital administrators and clinical staff onsite using a modified version of the Personnel, Infrastructure, Procedures, Equipment and Supplies (PIPES) tool from Surgeons OverSeas. We calculated percentage of facilities demonstrating adequacy of the assessed components, surgical case rates, operating theatre density and surgical workforce density.Results Twenty-seven government hospitals were surveyed (90% of the district hospitals, all central hospitals). Of the surgical workforce surveyed (n = 370), 92.7% were non-surgeons and 77% were clinical officers (COs). Of the 109 anaesthesia providers, 95.4% were non-physician anaesthetists (anaesthesia COs or ACOs). Non-surgeons and ACOs were the only providers of surgical services and anaesthetic services in 85% and 88.9% of hospitals, respectively. No specialists served the district hospitals. All of the hospitals experienced periods without external electricity. Most did not always have a functioning generator (78.3% district, 25% central) or running water (82.6%, 50%). None of the district hospitals had an Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Cricothyroidotomy, bowel resection and cholecystectomy were not done in over two-thirds of hospitals. Every hospital provided general anaesthesia but some did not always have a functioning anaesthesia machine (52.2%, 50%). Surgical rate, operating theatre density and surgical workforce density per 100 000 population was 289.48–747.38 procedures, 0.98 and 5.41 and 3.68 surgical providers, respectively.Conclusion COs form the backbone of Malawi’s surgical and anaesthetic workforce and should be supported with improvements in infrastructure as well as training and mentorship by specialist surgeons and anaesthetists.

Scarcity of protective items against HIV and other bloodborne infections in 13 low- and middle-income countries.

To assess protection of surgical healthcare workers against HIV and other bloodborne infections in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Literature review based on recent studies assessing baseline surgical capacity in LMICs using the WHO Situational Analysis of Access to Emergency and Essential Surgical Care, the Surgeons OverSeas (SOS) Personnel, Infrastructure, Procedures, Equipment and Supplies (PIPES) survey and the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative survey tools. The availability of protective eyewear, sterile gloves and sterilisers was assessed. Thirteen individual country studies with relevant data were identified documenting items from 399 hospitals. The countries included Afghanistan, Bolivia, Gambia, Ghana, Liberia, Mongolia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Tanzania and Zambia. Overall, only 29% (79/270) of hospitals always had eye protection. Sterilisers were only available at 64% (244/383) of facilities. Sterile gloves were the most available item, available at 75% of facilities (256/340). Surgical healthcare worker protection for bloodborne infections continues to be deficient in LMICs. Improved documentation of these items should be incorporated into future surgical capacity studies. Policy makers and clinicians should work together to secure resources and interventions that will protect this vital workforce.

Inter‐Rater Reliability of the PIPES Tool: Validation of a Surgical Capacity Index for Use in Resource‐Limited Settings

In response to the need for simple, rapid means of quantifying surgical capacity in low resource settings, Surgeons OverSeas (SOS) developed the personnel, infrastructure, procedures, equipment and supplies (PIPES) tool. The present investigation assessed the inter-rater reliability of the PIPES tool. As part of a government assessment of surgical services in Santa Cruz, Bolivia, the PIPES tool was translated into Spanish and applied in interviews with physicians at 31 public hospitals. An additional interview was conducted with nurses at a convenience sample of 25 of these hospitals. Physician and nurse responses were then compared to generate an estimate of reliability. For dichotomous survey items, inter-rater reliability between physicians and nurses was assessed using the Cohen's kappa statistic and percent agreement. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to assess agreement for continuous items. Cohen's kappa was 0.46 for infrastructure, 0.43 for procedures, 0.26 for equipment, and 0 for supplies sections. The median correlation coefficient was 0.91 for continuous items. Correlation was 0.79 for the PIPES index, and ranged from 0.32 to 0.98 for continuous response items. Reliability of the PIPES tool was moderate for the infrastructure and procedures sections, fair for the equipment section, and poor for supplies section when comparing surgeons' responses to nurses' responses-an extremely rigorous test of reliability. These results indicate that the PIPES tool is an effective measure of surgical capacity but that the equipment and supplies sections may need to be revised.

A quantitative analysis of surgical capacity in Santa Cruz, Bolivia

ObjectivesThis investigation aimed to document surgical capacity at public medical centers in a middle-income Latin American country using the Surgeons OverSeas (SOS) Personnel, Infrastructure, Procedures, Equipment, and Supplies (PIPES) survey tool. Materials and methodsWe applied the PIPES tool at six urban and 25 rural facilities in Santa Cruz, Bolivia. Outcome measures included the availability of items in five domains (Personnel, Infrastructure, Procedures, Equipment, and Supplies) and the PIPES index. PIPES indices were calculated by summing scores from each domain, dividing by the total number of survey items, and multiplying by 10. ResultsThirty-one of the 32 public facilities that provide surgical care in Santa Cruz were assessed. Santa Cruz had at least 7.8 surgeons and 2.8 anesthesiologists per 100,000 population. However, these providers were unequally distributed, such that nine rural sites had no anesthesiologist. Few rural facilities had blood banking (4/25), anesthesia machines (11/25), postoperative care (11/25), or intensive care units (1/25). PIPES indices ranged from 5.7–13.2, and were significantly higher in urban (median 12.6) than rural (median 7.8) areas (P < 0.01). ConclusionsThis investigation is novel in its application of a Spanish-language version of the PIPES tool in a middle-income Latin American country. These data document substantially greater surgical capacity in Santa Cruz than has been reported for Sierra Leone or Rwanda, consistent with Bolivia’s development status. Unfortunately, surgeons are limited in rural areas by deficits in anesthesia and perioperative services. These results are currently being used to target local quality improvement initiatives.

Assessment of Pediatric Surgery Capacity at Government Hospitals in Sierra Leone

Traditionally, efforts to reduce child mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have focused on infectious diseases. However, surgical care is increasingly seen as an important component of primary health care. To understand the baseline surgical capacity in LMICs, a number of studies have recently been published, but none has focused on pediatric surgery. The Surgeons OverSeas (SOS) Personnel, Infrastructure, Procedures, Equipment and Supplies (PIPES) survey was used to collect surgical capacity data from government hospitals in Sierra Leone. The data were analyzed specifically to identify baseline needs for pediatric surgery. Nine hospitals were assessed, and all had a functioning laboratory to test blood and urine and were capable of undertaking resuscitation, suturing, wound débridement, incision and drainage of an abscess, appendectomy, and male circumcision. However, in only 67 % could a pediatric hernia repair be performed, and in none were more complex procedures such as cleft lip and clubfoot repairs performed. Fewer than 50 % of facilities had sufficient gloves, nasogastric tubes, intravenous cannulas, syringes, needles, sutures, urinary catheters, infusion sets, anesthesia machines, or compressed oxygen. Using the standard PIPES tool, we found severe deficiencies in the pediatric surgical capacity at government hospitals in Sierra Leone. However, a pediatric-specific tool is required to understand more accurately the pediatric surgical situation.

A Tool and Index to Assess Surgical Capacity in Low Income Countries: An Initial Implementation in Sierra Leone

A first step toward improving surgical care in many low and middle income countries is to document the need. To facilitate the collection and analysis of surgical capacity data and measure changes over time, Surgeons OverSeas (SOS) developed a tool and index based on personnel, infrastructure, procedures, equipment, and supplies (PIPES). A follow-up assessment of 10 government hospitals in Sierra Leone was completed 42 months after an initial survey in 2008 using the PIPES tool. An index based on number of operating rooms, personnel, infrastructure, procedures, equipment, and supplies was calculated. An index was also calculated, using the 2008 data for comparison. Most hospitals demonstrated an increased index that correlated with site visits that verified improved conditions. Connaught Hospital in Sierra Leone had the highest score (9.2), consistent with its being the best equipped and staffed Ministry of Health and Sanitation facility. Makeni District Hospital had the greatest increase, from 3.8 to 7.5, consistent with a newly constructed facility. The PIPES tool was easily administered at hospitals in Sierra Leone and an index was found useful. Surgical capacity in Sierra Leone improved between 2008 and 2011, as demonstrated by an increase in the overall PIPES indices.