Background

In Tanzania, there is no national trauma registry. The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed a data set for injury that specifies the variables necessary for documenting the burden of injury and patient-related clinical processes. As a first step in developing and implementing a national Trauma Registry, we determined how well hospitals currently capture the variables that are specified in the WHO injury set.

Methods

This was a prospective, observational cross-sectional study of all trauma patients conducted in the Emergency Units of five regional referral hospitals in Tanzania from February 2018 to July 2018. Research assistants observed the provision of clinical care in the EU for all patients, and documented performed assessment, clinical interventions and final disposition. Research assistants used a purposefully designed case report form to audit the injury variable capture rate, and to review Ministry of Health (MoH) issued facility Register book recording the documentation of variables. We present descriptive statistics for hospital characteristics, patient volume, facility infrastructure, and capture rate of trauma variables.

Results

During the study period, 2891 (9.3%) patients presented with trauma-related complaints, 70.7% were male. Overall, the capture rate of all variables was 33.6%. Documentation was most complete for demographics 71.6%, while initial clinical condition, and details of injury were documented in 20.5 and 20.8% respectively. There was no documentation for the care prior to Emergency Unit arrival in all hospitals. 1430 (49.5%) of all trauma-related visits seen were documented in the facility Health Management Information System register submitted to the MoH. Among the cases reported in the register book, the date of EU care was correctly documented in 77% cases, age 43.6%, diagnosis 66.7%, and outcome in 38.9% cases. Among the observed procedures, initial clinical condition (28.7%), interventions at Emergency Unit (52.1%), investigations (49.0%), and disposition (62.9%) were documented in the clinical charts.

Conclusions

In the regional hospitals of Tanzania, there is inadequate documentation of the minimum trauma variables specified in the WHO injury data set. Reasons for this are unclear, but will need to be addressed in order to improve documentation to inform a national injury registry.

Background

Pediatric sepsis causes significant global morbidity and mortality and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) bear the bulk of the burden. International sepsis guidelines may not be relevant in LMICs, especially in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), due to resource constraints and population differences. There is a critical lack of pediatric sepsis data from SSA, without which accurate risk stratification tools and context-appropriate, evidence-based protocols cannot be developed. The study's objectives were to characterize pediatric sepsis presentations, interventions, and outcomes in a public Emergency Medicine Department (EMD) in Tanzania.

Methods

Prospective descriptive study of children (28 days to 14 years) with sepsis [suspected infection with ≥2 clinical systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria] presenting to a tertiary EMD in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania (July 1 to September 30, 2016). Outcomes included: in-hospital mortality (primary), EMD mortality, and hospital length of stay. We report descriptive statistics using means and SDs, medians and interquartile ranges, and counts and percentages as appropriate. Predictive abilities of SIRS criteria, the Alert-Verbal-Painful-Unresponsive (AVPU) score and the Lambaréné Organ Dysfunction Score (LODS) for in-hospital, early and late mortality were tested.

Results

Of the 2,232 children screened, 433 (19.4%) met inclusion criteria, and 405 were enrolled. There were 247 (61%) subjects referred from an outside facility. Approximately half (54.1%) received antibiotics in the EMD, and some form of microbiologic culture was collected in 35.8% (n = 145) of subjects. In-hospital and EMD mortality were 14.2 and 1.5%, respectively, median time to death was 3 days (IQR 1-6), and median length of stay was 6 days (IQR 1-12). SIRS criteria, the AVPU score, and the LODS had low positive (17-27.1, 33.3-43.9, 18.3-55.6%, respectively) and high negative predictive values (88.6-89.8, 86.5-91.2, 86.8-90.5%, respectively) for in-hospital mortality.

Conclusion

This pediatric sepsis cohort had high and early in-hospital mortality. Current criteria and tested clinical scores were inadequate for risk-stratification and mortality prediction in this population and setting. Pediatric sepsis management must take into account the local patient population, etiologies of sepsis, healthcare system, and resource availability. Only through studies such as this that generate regional data in LMICs can accurate risk stratification tools and context-appropriate, evidence-based guidelines be developed.

BACKGROUND:Trauma registries (TRs) are essential to informing the quality of trauma care within health systems. Lack of standardised trauma documentation is a major cause of inconsistent and poor availability of trauma data in most low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), hindering the development of TRs in these regions. We explored health providers' perceptions on the use of a standardised trauma form to record trauma patient information in Tanzania. METHODS:An exploratory qualitative research using a semi-structured interview guide was carried out to purposefully selected key informants comprising of healthcare providers working in Emergency Units and surgical disciplines in five regional hospitals in Tanzania. Data were analysed using a thematic analysis approach to identify key themes surrounding potential implementation of the standardised trauma form. RESULTS:Thirty-three healthcare providers participated, the majority of whom had no experience in the use of standardised charting. Only five respondents had prior experience with trauma forms. Responses fell into three themes: perspectives on the concept of a standardised trauma form, potential benefits of a trauma form, and concerns regarding successful and sustainable implementation. CONCLUSION:Findings of this study revealed wide healthcare provider acceptance of moving towards standardised clinical documentation for trauma patients. Successful implementation likely depends on the perceived benefits of using a trauma form as a tool to guide clinical management, standardise care and standardise data reporting; however, it will be important moving forward to factor concerns brought up in this study. Potential barriers to successful and sustainable implementation of the form, including the need for training and tailoring of form to match existing resources and knowledge of providers, must be considered.

Objective

To estimate the global and national burden of emergency conditions, and compare them to emergency care usage rates.

Methods

We coded all 291 Global Burden of Disease 2010 conditions into three categories to estimate emergency burden: conditions that, if not addressed within hours to days of onset, commonly lead to serious disability or death; conditions with common acute decompensations that lead to serious disability or death; and non-emergencies. Emergency care usage rates were obtained from a systematic literature review on emergency care facilities in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), supplemented by national health system reports.

Findings

All 15 leading causes of death and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) globally were conditions with potential emergent manifestations. We identified 41 facility-based reports in 23 countries, 12 of which were in LMICs; data for 17 additional countries were obtained from national or regional reports on emergency usage. Burden of emergency conditions was the highest in low-income countries, with median DALYs of 47 728 per 100 000 population (IQR 45 253-50 085) in low-income, 25 186 (IQR 21 982-40 480) in middle-income and 15 691 (IQR 14 649-16 382) in high-income countries. Patterns were similar using deaths to measure burden and excluding acute decompensations from the definition of emergency conditions. Conversely, emergency usage rates were the lowest in low-income countries, with median 8 visits per 1000 population (IQR 6-10), 78 (IQR 25-197) in middle-income and 264 (IQR 177-341) in high-income countries.

Conclusions

Despite higher burden of emergency conditions, emergency usage rates are substantially lower in LMICs, likely due to limited access to emergency care.

Introduction

There is little research on emergency care delivery in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). To facilitate future research, we aimed to assess the set of key metrics currently used by researchers in these settings and to propose a set of standard metrics to facilitate future research.

Methods

Systematic literature review of 43,109 published reports on general emergency care from 139 LMICs. Studies describing care for subsets of emergency conditions, subsets of populations, and data aggregated across multiple facilities were excluded. All facility- and patient-level statistics reported in these studies were recorded and the most commonly used metrics were identified.

Results

We identified 195 studies on emergency care delivery in LMICs. There was little uniformity in either patient- or facility-level metrics reported. Patient demographics were inconsistently reported: only 33% noted average age and 63% the gender breakdown. The upper age boundary used for paediatric data varied widely, from 5 to 20 years of age. Emergency centre capacity was reported using a variety of metrics including annual patient volume (n = 175, 90%); bed count (n = 60, 31%), number of rooms (n = 48, 25%); frequently none of these metrics were reported (n = 16, 8%). Many characteristics essential to describe capabilities and performance of emergency care were not reported, including use and type of triage; level of provider training; admission rate; time to evaluation; and length of EC stay.

Conclusion

We found considerable heterogeneity in reporting practices for studies of emergency care in LMICs. Standardised metrics could facilitate future analysis and interpretation of such studies, and expand the ability to generalise and compare findings across emergency care settings.

Objective

To conduct a systematic review of emergency care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Methods

We searched PubMed, CINAHL and World Health Organization (WHO) databases for reports describing facility-based emergency care and obtained unpublished data from a network of clinicians and researchers. We screened articles for inclusion based on their titles and abstracts in English or French. We extracted data on patient outcomes and demographics as well as facility and provider characteristics. Analyses were restricted to reports published from 1990 onwards.

Findings

We identified 195 reports concerning 192 facilities in 59 countries. Most were academically-affiliated hospitals in urban areas. The median mortality within emergency departments was 1.8% (interquartile range, IQR: 0.2-5.1%). Mortality was relatively high in paediatric facilities (median: 4.8%; IQR: 2.3-8.4%) and in sub-Saharan Africa (median: 3.4%; IQR: 0.5-6.3%). The median number of patients was 30 000 per year (IQR: 10 296-60 000), most of whom were young (median age: 35 years; IQR: 6.9-41.0) and male (median: 55.7%; IQR: 50.0-59.2%). Most facilities were staffed either by physicians-in-training or by physicians whose level of training was unspecified. Very few of these providers had specialist training in emergency care.

Conclusion

Available data on emergency care in LMICs indicate high patient loads and mortality, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, where a substantial proportion of all deaths may occur in emergency departments. The combination of high volume and the urgency of treatment make emergency care an important area of focus for interventions aimed at reducing mortality in these settings.

Introduction

There is little research on emergency care delivery in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). To facilitate future research, we aimed to assess the set of key metrics currently used by researchers in these settings and to propose a set of standard metrics to facilitate future research.

Methods

Systematic literature review of 43,109 published reports on general emergency care from 139 LMICs. Studies describing care for subsets of emergency conditions, subsets of populations, and data aggregated across multiple facilities were excluded. All facility- and patient-level statistics reported in these studies were recorded and the most commonly used metrics were identified.

Results

We identified 195 studies on emergency care delivery in LMICs. There was little uniformity in either patient- or facility-level metrics reported. Patient demographics were inconsistently reported: only 33% noted average age and 63% the gender breakdown. The upper age boundary used for paediatric data varied widely, from 5 to 20 years of age. Emergency centre capacity was reported using a variety of metrics including annual patient volume (n = 175, 90%); bed count (n = 60, 31%), number of rooms (n = 48, 25%); frequently none of these metrics were reported (n = 16, 8%). Many characteristics essential to describe capabilities and performance of emergency care were not reported, including use and type of triage; level of provider training; admission rate; time to evaluation; and length of EC stay.

Conclusion

We found considerable heterogeneity in reporting practices for studies of emergency care in LMICs. Standardised metrics could facilitate future analysis and interpretation of such studies, and expand the ability to generalise and compare findings across emergency care settings.

Background: Over 40% of the global burden of sepsis occurs in children under 5 years of age, making pediatric sepsis the top cause of death for this age group. Prior studies have shown that outcomes in children with sepsis improve by minimizing the time between symptom onset and treatment. This is a challenge in resource-limited settings where access to definitive care is limited. Methods: A secondary analysis was performed on data from 1,803 patients (28 days-14 years old) who presented to the emergency department (ED) at Muhimbili National Hospital (MNH) from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017 with a suspected infection and ≥2 clinical systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria. The objective of this study was to determine the relationship between delayed presentation to definitive care (>48 h between fever onset and presentation to the ED) and mortality, as well as the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and delayed presentation. Multivariable logistic regression models tested the two relationships of interest. We report both unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Results: During the study period, 11.3% (n = 203) of children who presented to MNH with sepsis died inhospital. Delayed presentation was more common in non-survivors (n = 90/151, 60%) compared to survivors (n = 614/1,353, 45%) (p ≤ 0.01). Children who had delayed presentation to definitive care, compared to those who did not, had an adjusted odds ratio for mortality of 1.85 (95% CI: 1.17-3.00). Conclusions: Delayed presentation was an independent risk factor for mortality in this cohort, emphasizing the importance of timely presentation to care for pediatric sepsis patients. Potential interventions include more efficient referral networks and emergency transportation systems to MNH. Additional clinics or hospitals with pediatric critical care may reduce pediatric sepsis mortality in Tanzania, as well as parental education programs for recognizing pediatric sepsis.

OBJECTIVE: Translation of evidence to practice is a public health priority. Worldwide, injury is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Case study publications are common and provide potentially reproducible examples of successful interventions in healthcare from the patient to systems level. However, data on how well case study publications are utilized are limited. To our knowledge, the World Health Organization (WHO) published the only collection of international case studies on injury care at the policy level. We aimed to determine the degree to which these injury care case studies have been translated to practice and to identify opportunities for enhancement of the evidence-to-practice pathway for injury care case studies overall. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review across 19 databases by searching for the title, Strengthening care for the injured: Success stories and lessons learned from around the world. Data synthesis included realist narrative methods and two authors independently reviewed articles for injury topics, reference details, and extent of utilization. FINDINGS: Forty-seven publications referenced the compilation of case studies, 20 of which included further descriptions of one or more of the specific cases and underwent narrative review. The most common category utilized was hospital-based care (15 publications), with the example of Thailands quality improvement (QI) programme (10 publications) being the most commonly cited case. Also frequently cited were case studies on prehospital care (10 publications). There was infrequent utilization of case studies on rehabilitation (3 publications) and trauma systems (2 publications). No reference described a case translated to a new scenario. CONCLUSIONS: The only available collection of policy-level injury care case studies has been utilized to a moderate extent however we found no evidence of case study translation to a new circumstance. QI programs seem especially amenable for knowledge-sharing through case studies. Prehospital care also showed promise. Greater emphasis on rehabilitation and health policy related to trauma systems is warranted. There is also a need for greater methodologic rigor in evaluation of the use of case study collections in general.