IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1003749.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Justine I Davies
  • Adrian W Gelb
  • Julian Gore-Booth
  • Jannicke Mellin-Olsen
  • Janet Martin
  • Christina Åkerman
  • Emmanuel A Ameh
  • Bruce M Biccard
  • Geir Sverre Braut
  • Kathryn M Chu
  • Miliard Derbew
  • Hege Langli Ersdal
  • Jose Miguel Guzman
  • Lars Hagander
  • Carolina Haylock-Loor
  • Hampus Holmer
  • Walter Johnson
  • Sabrina Juran
  • Nicolas J Kassebaum
  • Tore Laerdal
  • Andrew J M Leather
  • Michael S Lipnick
  • David Ljungman
  • Emmanuel Malabo Mwenda Makasa
  • John G Meara
  • Mark W Newton
  • Doris Østergaard
  • Teri Reynolds
  • Lauri J Romanzi
  • Vatshalan Santhirapala
  • Mark G Shrime
  • Kjetil Søreide
  • Margit Steinholt
  • Emi Suzuki
  • John E Varallo
  • Gerard H A Visser
  • David Watters
  • Thomas G Weiser

Abstract

Background: 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. Methods and findings: 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. Conclusions: 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. Justine Davies and colleagues discuss the development of updated indicators to support global achievement of access to safe surgical, anaesthetic, and obstetric care.

Suggested Citation

  • Justine I Davies & Adrian W Gelb & Julian Gore-Booth & Jannicke Mellin-Olsen & Janet Martin & Christina Åkerman & Emmanuel A Ameh & Bruce M Biccard & Geir Sverre Braut & Kathryn M Chu & Miliard Derbew, 2021. "Global surgery, obstetric, and anaesthesia indicator definitions and reporting: An Utstein consensus report," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(8), pages 1-13, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003749
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003749
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003749
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003749&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003749?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003749. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.