Dataset Information

Thefeasibility, appropriateness, and applicability of trauma scoring systems in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT: Background:About 5.8 million people die each year as a result of injuries, and nearly 90% of these deaths occur in low and middle-income countries (LMIC). Trauma scoring is a cornerstone of trauma quality improvement (QI) efforts, and is key to organizing and evaluating trauma services. The objective of this review was to assess the appropriateness, feasibility, and QI applicability of traditional trauma scoring systems in LMIC settings. Materials and methods:This systematic review searched PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and trauma-focused journals for articles describing the use of a standardized trauma scoring system to characterize holistic health status. Studies conducted in high-income countries (HIC) or describing scores for isolated anatomic locations were excluded. Data reporting a score's capacity to discriminate mortality, feasibility of implementation, or use for QI were extracted and synthesized. Results:Of the 896 articles screened, 336 were included. Over half of studies (56%) reported Glasgow Coma Scale, followed by Injury Severity Score (ISS; 51%), Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS; 24%), Revised Trauma Score (RTS; 19%), Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS; 14%), and Kampala Trauma Score (7%). While ISS was overwhelmingly predictive of mortality, 12 articles reported limited feasibility of ISS and/or AIS. RTS consistently underestimated injury severity. Over a third of articles (37%) reporting TRISS assessmentsobserved mortality that was greater than that predicted by TRISS. Several articles cited limited human resources as the key challenge to feasibility. Conclusions:The findings of this review reveal that implementing systems designed for HICs may not be relevant to the burden and resources available in LMICs. Adaptations or alternative scoring systems may be more effective. PROSPERO registration number:CRD42017064600.

SUBMITTER: Feldhaus I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7223475 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Thefeasibility, appropriateness, and applicability of trauma scoring systems in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

Feldhaus Isabelle I Carvalho Melissa M Waiz Ghazel G Igu Joel J Matthay Zachary Z Dicker Rochelle R Juillard Catherine C

Trauma surgery & acute care open 20200506 1

<h4>Background</h4>About 5.8 million people die each year as a result of injuries, and nearly 90% of these deaths occur in low and middle-income countries (LMIC). Trauma scoring is a cornerstone of trauma quality improvement (QI) efforts, and is key to organizing and evaluating trauma services. The objective of this review was to assess the appropriateness, feasibility, and QI applicability of traditional trauma scoring systems in LMIC settings.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>This systematic revie ...[more]

PMID: 32420451

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPrognostic models-used in critical care medicine for mortality predictions, for benchmarking and for illness stratification in clinical trials-have been validated predominantly in high-income countries. These results may not be reproducible in low or middle-income countries (LMICs), not only because of different case-mix characteristics but also because of missing predictor variables. The study objective was to systematically review literature on the use of critical care prognostic models in LMICs and assess their ability to discriminate between survivors and non-survivors at hospital discharge of those admitted to intensive care units (ICUs), their calibration, their accuracy, and the manner in which missing values were handled.MethodsThe PubMed database was searched in March 2017 to identify research articles reporting the use and performance of prognostic models in the evaluation of mortality in ICUs in LMICs. Studies carried out in ICUs in high-income countries or paediatric ICUs and studies that evaluated disease-specific scoring systems, were limited to a specific disease or single prognostic factor, were published only as abstracts, editorials, letters and systematic and narrative reviews or were not in English were excluded.ResultsOf the 2233 studies retrieved, 473 were searched and 50 articles reporting 119 models were included. Five articles described the development and evaluation of new models, whereas 114 articles externally validated Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation, the Simplified Acute Physiology Score and Mortality Probability Models or versions thereof. Missing values were only described in 34% of studies; exclusion and or imputation by normal values were used. Discrimination, calibration and accuracy were reported in 94.0%, 72.4% and 25% respectively. Good discrimination and calibration were reported in 88.9% and 58.3% respectively. However, only 10 evaluations that reported excellent discrimination also reported good calibration. Generalisability of the findings was limited by variability of inclusion and exclusion criteria, unavailability of post-ICU outcomes and missing value handling.ConclusionsRobust interpretations regarding the applicability of prognostic models are currently hampered by poor adherence to reporting guidelines, especially when reporting missing value handling. Performance of mortality risk prediction models in LMIC ICUs is at best moderate, especially with limitations in calibration. This necessitates continued efforts to develop and validate LMIC models with readily available prognostic variables, perhaps aided by medical registries.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Trauma represents a major global health problem projected to increase in importance over the next decade. The majority of deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where survival rates are lower than their high-income country (HIC) counterparts. Health system level changes in care for injured patients have been attributed to significant improvements in care quality and outcomes in HIC settings. There is a need for further research to assess trauma care health systems in LMICs to inform health system strengthening for the care of the injured. This study aims to conduct a narrative synthesis of a systematic search of the literature on the assessment of trauma care health systems in LMICs in order to inform the further development of trauma care health system assessment. METHODS:The review will include primary quantitative, qualitative or mixed method studies and secondary literature reviews. No restriction will be placed on language or date. Reports and publications identified from the grey literature including from relevant national and international health organisations will be included. Articles will be screened by two independent reviewers with a third reviewer resolving any persisting disagreement. The search will reveal heterogenous studies not suitable for meta-analysis. A narrative synthesis of the identified papers will be conducted to identify key methodological ideas and paradigms used to assess trauma care health systems. The analysis will consider how the differing methodological approaches could be adopted to understand barriers and delays to seeking, reaching and receiving care within a "Three Delays" framework. An iterative approach will be adopted to categorise identified articles, with the results presented as both within and across study analysis. DISCUSSION:The results of the review will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed academic journal. The study forms part of a PhD project. The results will inform the development of a trauma care health system assessment applicable to LMICs. As this is a review of secondary data, no formal ethical approval is required. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42018112990.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The benefits of trauma registries have been well described. The crucial data they provide may guide injury prevention strategies, inform resource allocation, and support advocacy and policy. This has been shown to reduce trauma-related mortality in various settings. Trauma remains a leading cause of mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, the implementation of trauma registries in LMICs can be challenging due to lack of funding, specialized personnel, and infrastructure. This study explores strategies for successful trauma registry implementation in LMICs. METHODS:The protocol was registered a priori (CRD42017058586). A peer-reviewed search strategy of multiple databases will be developed with a senior librarian. As per PRISMA guidelines, first screen of references based on abstract and title and subsequent full-text review will be conducted by two independent reviewers. Disagreements that cannot be resolved by discussion between reviewers shall be arbitrated by the principal investigator. Data extraction will be performed using a pre-defined data extraction sheet. Finally, bibliographies of included articles will be hand-searched. Studies of any design will be included if they describe or review development and implementation of a trauma registry in LMICs. No language or period restrictions will be applied. Summary statistics and qualitative meta-narrative analyses will be performed. DISCUSSION:The significant burden of trauma in LMIC environments presents unique challenges and limitations. Adapted strategies for deployment and maintenance of sustainable trauma registries are needed. Our methodology will systematically identify recommendations and strategies for successful trauma registry implementation in LMICs and describe threats and barriers to this endeavor. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:The protocol was registered on the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews ( CRD42017058586 ).

Project description:Neonatal birth trauma, although it has steadily decreased in industrialized nations, constitutes a significant health burden in low-resource settings. Keeping with this, we sought to determine the pooled cumulative incidence (incidence proportion) of birth trauma and identify potential contributing factors in low and middle-income countries. Besides, we aimed to describe the temporal trend, clinical pattern, and immediate adverse neonatal outcomes of birth trauma. We searched articles published in the English language in the Excerpta Medica database, PubMed, Web of Science, Google, African Journals Online, Google Scholar, Scopus, and in the reference list of retrieved articles. Literature search strategies were developed using medical subject headings and text words related to the outcomes of the study. The Joana Briggs Institute quality assessment tool was employed and articles with appraisal scores of seven or more were deemed suitable to be included in the meta-analysis. Data were analyzed using the random-effect Dersimonian-Laird model. The full search identified a total of 827 articles about neonatal birth trauma. Of these, 37 articles involving 365,547 participants met the inclusion criteria. The weighted pooled cumulative incidence of birth trauma was estimated at 34 per 1,000 live births (95% confidence interval (CI) 30.5 to 38.5) with the highest incidence observed in Africa at 52.9 per 1,000 live births (95% CI 46.5 to 59.4). Being born to a mother from rural areas (odds ratio (OR), 1.61; 95% CI1.18 to 2.21); prolonged labor (OR, 5.45; 95% CI 2.30, 9.91); fetal malpresentation at delivery (OR, 4.70; 95% CI1.75 to 12.26); shoulder dystocia (OR, 6.11; 95% CI3.84 to 9.74); operative vaginal delivery (assisted vacuum or forceps extraction) (OR, 3.19; 95% CI 1.92 to 5.31); and macrosomia (OR, 5.06; 95% CI 2.76 to 9.29) were factors associated with neonatal birth trauma. In conclusion, we found a considerably high incidence proportion of neonatal birth trauma in low and middle-income countries. Therefore, early identification of risk factors and prompt decisions on the mode of delivery can potentially contribute to the decreased magnitude and impacts of neonatal birth trauma and promote the newborn's health.

Project description:IntroductionMedication non-adherence is an important public health issue, associated with poor clinical and economic outcomes. Globally, self-reported instruments are the most widely used method to assess medication adherence. However, the majority of these were developed in high-income countries (HICs) with a well-established health care system. Their applicability in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) remains unclear. The objective of this study is to systematically review the applicability of content and use of self-reported adherence instruments in LMICs.MethodA scoping review informed by a literature search in Pubmed, EBSCO, and Cochrane databases was conducted to identify studies assessing medication adherence using self-reported instruments for patients with five common chronic diseases [hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, asthma, or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)] in LMICs up to January 2022 with no constraints on publication year. Two reviewers performed the study selection process, data extraction and outcomes assessment independently. Outcomes focused on LMIC applicability of the self-reported adherence instruments assessed by (i) containing LMIC relevant adherence content; (ii) methodological quality and (iii) fees for use.FindingsWe identified 181 studies that used self-reported instruments for assessing medication adherence in LMICs. A total of 32 distinct types of self-reported instruments to assess medication adherence were identified. Of these, 14 self-reported instruments were developed in LMICs, while the remaining ones were adapted from self-reported instruments originally developed in HICs. All self-reported adherence instruments in studies included presented diverse potential challenges regarding their applicability in LMICs, included an underrepresentation of LMIC relevant non-adherence reasons, such as financial issues, use of traditional medicines, religious beliefs, lack of communication with healthcare provider, running out of medicine, and access to care. Almost half of included studies showed that the existing self-reported adherence instruments lack sufficient evidence regarding cross cultural validation and internal consistency. In 70% of the studies, fees applied for using the self-reported instruments in LMICs.ConclusionThere seems insufficient emphasis on applicability and methodological rigor of self-reported medication adherence instruments used in LMICs. This presents an opportunity for developing a self-reported adherence instrument that is suitable to health systems and resources in LMICs.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42022302215.

Dataset Information

Thefeasibility, appropriateness, and applicability of trauma scoring systems in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

Publications

Thefeasibility, appropriateness, and applicability of trauma scoring systems in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets