Global surgery, obstetric, and anaesthesia indicator definitions and reporting: An Utstein consensus report

Indicators to evaluate progress towards timely access to safe surgical, anaesthesia, and obstetric (SAO) care were proposed in 2015 by the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery. These aimed to capture access to surgery, surgical workforce, surgical volume, perioperative mortality rate, and catastrophi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:PLoS medicine Vol. 18; no. 8; p. e1003749
Main Authors: Davies, Justine I, Gelb, Adrian W, Gore-Booth, Julian, Martin, Janet, Mellin-Olsen, Jannicke, Åkerman, Christina, Ameh, Emmanuel A, Biccard, Bruce M, Braut, Geir Sverre, Chu, Kathryn M, Derbew, Miliard, Ersdal, Hege Langli, Guzman, Jose Miguel, Hagander, Lars, Haylock-Loor, Carolina, Holmer, Hampus, Johnson, Walter, Juran, Sabrina, Kassebaum, Nicolas J, Laerdal, Tore, Leather, Andrew J. M, Lipnick, Michael S, Ljungman, David, Makasa, Emmanuel M, Meara, John G, Newton, Mark W, Østergaard, Doris, Reynolds, Teri, Romanzi, Lauri J, Santhirapala, Vatshalan, Shrime, Mark G, Søreide, Kjetil, Steinholt, Margit, Suzuki, Emi, Varallo, John E, Visser, Gerard H. A, Watters, David, Weiser, Thomas G
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: San Francisco Public Library of Science 20-08-2021
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Indicators to evaluate progress towards timely access to safe surgical, anaesthesia, and obstetric (SAO) care were proposed in 2015 by the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery. These aimed to capture access to surgery, surgical workforce, surgical volume, perioperative mortality rate, and catastrophic and impoverishing financial consequences of surgery. Despite being rapidly taken up by practitioners, data points from which to derive the indicators were not defined, limiting comparability across time or settings. We convened global experts to evaluate and explicitly define-for the first time-the indicators to improve comparability and support achievement of 2030 goals to improve access to safe affordable surgical and anaesthesia care globally. The Utstein process for developing and reporting guidelines through a consensus building process was followed. In-person discussions at a 2-day meeting were followed by an iterative process conducted by email and virtual group meetings until consensus was reached. The meeting was held between June 16 to 18, 2019; discussions continued until August 2020. Participants consisted of experts in surgery, anaesthesia, and obstetric care, data science, and health indicators from high-, middle-, and low-income countries. Considering each of the 6 indicators in turn, we refined overarching descriptions and agreed upon data points needed for construction of each indicator at current time (basic data points), and as each evolves over 2 to 5 (intermediate) and >5 year (full) time frames. We removed one of the original 6 indicators (one of 2 financial risk protection indicators was eliminated) and refined descriptions and defined data points required to construct the 5 remaining indicators: geospatial access, workforce, surgical volume, perioperative mortality, and catastrophic expenditure. To track global progress towards timely access to quality SAO care, these indicators-at the basic level-should be implemented universally as soon as possible. Intermediate and full indicator sets should be achieved by all countries over time. Meanwhile, these evolutions can assist in the short term in developing national surgical plans and collecting more detailed data for research studies.
Bibliography:new_version
Writing committee.
I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: Tore Laerdal is Executive Director of the Laerdal Foundation, which provided financial support for the meeting. Tore provided practical support for the meeting and read and approved the manuscript, but did not input into the consensus process or conclusions.
ISSN:1549-1676
1549-1277
1549-1676
DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1003749