Dataset Information

Geospatial analysis of pediatric surgical need and geographical access to care in Somaliland: a cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The global burden of disease in children is large and disproportionally affects low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Geospatial analysis offers powerful tools to quantify and visualise disparities in surgical care in LMICs. Our study aims to analyse the geographical distribution of paediatric surgical conditions and to evaluate the geographical access to surgical care in Somaliland.

Methods

Using the Surgeons OverSeas Assessment of Surgical Need survey and a combined survey from the WHO's (WHO) Surgical Assessment Tool-Hospital Walkthrough and the Global Initiative for Children's Surgery Global Assessment in Paediatric Surgery, we collected data on surgical burden and access from 1503 children and 15 hospitals across Somaliland. We used several geospatial tools, including hotspot analysis, service area analysis, Voronoi diagrams, and Inverse Distance Weighted interpolation to estimate the geographical distribution of paediatric surgical conditions and access to care across Somaliland.

Results

Our analysis suggests less than 10% of children have timely access to care across Somaliland. Patients could travel up to 12 hours by public transportation and more than 2 days by foot to reach surgical care. There are wide geographical disparities in the prevalence of paediatric surgical conditions and access to surgical care across regions. Disparities are greater among children travelling by foot and living in rural areas, where the delay to receive surgery often exceeds 3 years. Overall, Sahil and Sool were the regions that combined the highest need and the poorest surgical care coverage.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated wide disparities in the distribution of surgical disease and access to surgical care for children across Somaliland. Geospatial analysis offers powerful tools to identify critical areas and strategically allocate resources and interventions to efficiently scale-up surgical care for children in Somaliland.

SUBMITTER: Cotache-Condor CF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8296779 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe unmet burden of surgical care is high in low-income and middle-income countries. The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery (LCoGS) proposed six indicators to guide the development of national plans for improving and monitoring access to essential surgical care. This study aimed to characterise the Somaliland surgical health system according to the LCoGS indicators and provide recommendations for next-step interventions.MethodsIn this cross-sectional nationwide study, the WHO's Surgical Assessment Tool-Hospital Walkthrough and geographical mapping were used for data collection at 15 surgically capable hospitals. LCoGS indicators for preparedness was defined as access to timely surgery and specialist surgical workforce density (surgeons, anaesthesiologists and obstetricians/SAO), delivery was defined as surgical volume, and impact was defined as protection against impoverishment and catastrophic expenditure. Indicators were compared with the LCoGS goals and were stratified by region.ResultsThe healthcare system in Somaliland does not meet any of the six LCoGS targets for preparedness, delivery or impact. We estimate that only 19% of the population has timely access to essential surgery, less than the LCoGS goal of 80% coverage. The number of specialist SAO providers is 0.8 per 100 000, compared with an LCoGS goal of 20 SAO per 100 000. Surgical volume is 368 procedures per 100 000 people, while the LCoGS goal is 5000 procedures per 100 000. Protection against impoverishing expenditures was only 18% and against catastrophic expenditures 1%, both far below the LCoGS goal of 100% protection.ConclusionWe found several gaps in the surgical system in Somaliland using the LCoGS indicators and target goals. These metrics provide a broad view of current status and gaps in surgical care, and can be used as benchmarks of progress towards universal health coverage for the provision of safe, affordable, and timely surgical, obstetric and anaesthesia care in Somaliland.

Project description:Based on relative population size and burden of disease, emergency care publication outputs from low- and middle-income regions are disproportionately lower than those of high-income regions. Ironically, outputs from regions with higher publication rates are often less relevant in the African context. As a result, the dissemination of and access to local research is essential to local researchers, but the cost of this access (actual and cost-wise) remains unknown. The aim of this study was to describe access to African emergency care publications in terms of publisher-based access (open access or subscription) and alternate access (self-archived or author provided), as well as the cost of access.We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study using all emergency medicine publications included in Scopus between 2011 and 2015. A sequential search strategy described access to each article, and we calculated mean article charges against the purchasing power parity index (used to describe out-of-pocket expense).We included 666 publications from 49 journals, of which 395 (59.3%) were open access. For subscription-based articles, 106 (39.1%) were self-archived, 60 (22.1%) were author-provided, and 105 (38.8%) were inaccessible. Mean article access cost was $36.44, and mean processing charge was $2,319.34. Using the purchasing power parity index it was calculated that equivalent out-of-pocket expenditure for South African, Ghanaian and Tanzanian authors would respectively be $15.77, $10.44 and $13.04 for access, and $1,004.02, $664.36 and $830.27 for processing. Based on this, the corrected cost of a single-unit article access or process charge for South African, Ghanaian and Tanzanian authors, respectively, was 2.3, 3.5 and 2.8 times higher than the standard rate.One in six African emergency care publications are inaccessible outside institutional library subscriptions; additionally, the cost of access to publications in low- and middle-income countries appears prohibitive. Publishers should strongly consider revising pricing for more equitable access for researchers from low- and middle-income countries.