Search

Abstract Background Humeral shaft fractures, constituting 3–5% of musculoskeletal injuries, are commonly managed conservatively using functional braces. However, this approach may not be feasible in resource-limited settings. This study aimed to evaluate the functional outcomes of nonoperative treatment for humeral shaft fractures in adults utilizing a U-shaped slab. Methods This prospective study was conducted from August 2021 to August 2022 involving 16-year-old and older individuals who received nonsurgical treatment for humeral shaft fractures at public tertiary hospitals in Rwanda. The assessment focused on various functional outcomes, including alignment, union rate, range of motion, return to activities of daily living, and DASH score. Results The study included 73 participants, predominantly males (73.9%), with a median age of 33 years. The union rate was high at 89.04%, and 10.96% experienced delayed union. Radial nerve palsy occurred in 4.11% of patients, but all the patients fully recovered within three months. Despite angular deformities during healing in the majority of participants, these deformities did not significantly impact functional outcomes. According to the international classification of disabilities, 77% of participants achieved a good functional grade. Conclusion The conservative U-shaped slab method was effective at managing humeral shaft fractures. However, optimal results necessitate careful participant selection and comprehensive rehabilitation education. Implementing these measures can improve the overall success of nonoperative management.

Objective A vital component of a prehospital emergency care system is getting an injured patient to the right hospital at the right time. Process and information flow mapping are recognised methods to show where efficiencies can be made. We aimed to understand the process and information flows used by the prehospital emergency service in transporting community emergencies in Rwanda in order to identify areas for improvement.Design Two facilitated process/information mapping workshops were conducted. Process maps were produced in real time during discussions and shared with participants for their agreement. They were further validated by field observations.Setting The study took place in two prehospital care settings serving predominantly rural and predominantly urban patients.Participants 24 healthcare professionals from various cadres. Field observations were done on 49 emergencies across both sites.Results Two maps were produced, and four main process stages were described: (1) call triage by the dispatch/call centre team, (2) scene triage by the ambulance team, (3) patient monitoring by the ambulance team on the way to the health facility and (4) handover process at the health facility. The first key finding was that the rural site had multiple points of entry into the system for emergency patients, whereas the urban system had one point of entry (the national emergency number); processes were otherwise similar between sites. The second was that although large amounts of information were collected to inform decision-making about which health facility to transfer patients to, participants found it challenging to articulate the intellectual process by which they used this to make decisions; guidelines were not used for decision-making.Discussion We have identified several areas of the prehospital care processes where there can be efficiencies. To make efficiencies in the decision-making process and produce a standard approach for all patients will require protocolising care pathways.

Objectives Using the ‘Four Delay’ framework, our study aimed to identify and explore barriers to accessing quality injury care from the injured patients’, caregivers’ and community leaders’ perspectives.Design A qualitative study assessing barriers to trauma care comprising 20 in-depth semistructured interviews and 4 focus group discussions was conducted. The data were analysed thematically.Setting This qualitative study was conducted in Rwanda’s rural Burera District, located in the Northern Province, and in Kigali City, the country’s urban capital, to capture both the rural and urban population’s experiences of being injured.Participants Purposively selected participants were individuals from urban and rural communities who had accessed injury care in the previous 6 months or cared for the injured people, and community leaders. Fifty-one participants, 13 females and 38 males ranging from 21 to 68 years of age participated in interviews and focus group discussions. Thirty-six (71%) were former trauma patients with a wide range of injuries including fractured long bones (9, 45%), other fractures, head injury, polytrauma (3, 15% each), abdominal trauma (1, 5%), and lacerations (1, 5%), while the rest were caregivers and community leaders.Results Multiple barriers were identified cutting across all levels of the ‘Four Delays’ framework, including barriers to seeking, reaching, receiving and remaining in care. Key barriers mentioned by participants in both interviews and focus group discussions were: lack of community health insurance, limited access to ambulances, insufficient number of trauma care specialists and a high volume of trauma patients. The rigid referral process and lack of decentralised rehabilitation services were also identified as significant barriers to accessing quality care for injured patients.Conclusions Future interventions to improve access to injury care in Rwanda must be informed by the identified barriers along the spectrum of care, from the point of injury to receipt of care and rehabilitation.

Objectives This study aims to evaluate health systems governance for injury care in three sub-Saharan countries from policymakers’ and injury care providers’ perspectives.Setting Ghana, Rwanda and South Africa.Design Based on Siddiqi et al’s framework for governance, we developed an online assessment tool for health system governance for injury with 37 questions covering health policy and implementation under 10 overarching principles of strategic vision, participation and consensus orientation, rule of law, transparency, responsiveness of institutions, equity, effectiveness or efficiency, accountability, ethics and intelligence and information. A literature review was also done to support the scoring. We derived scores using two methods—investigator scores and respondent scores.Participants The tool was sent out to purposively selected stakeholders, including policymakers and injury care providers in Ghana, Rwanda and South Africa. Data were collected between October 2020 and February 2021.Primary and secondary outcomes Investigator-weighted and respondent percentage scores for health system governance for injury care. This was calculated for each country in total and per principle.Results Rwanda had the highest overall investigator-weighted percentage score (70%), followed by South Africa (59%). Ghana had the lowest overall investigator score (48%). The overall results were similar for the respondent scores. Some areas, such as participation and consensus, scored high in all three countries, while other areas, such as transparency, scored very low.Conclusion In this multicountry governance survey, we provide insight into and evaluation of health system governance for trauma in three low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in sub-Saharan Africa. It highlights areas of improvement that need to be prioritised, such as transparency, to meet the high burden of trauma and injuries in LMICs.

IntroductionMore than a third of the world's population was under full or partial lockdown during COVID-19 by April 2020. Such mitigation measures might have affected participation in various Physical activity (PA) and increased sedentary time. This study aimed to assess the effect of the COVID-19 mitigation measures on participation of adults in various PA types in Rwanda.MethodsWe collected data from conveniently selected participants at their respective PA sites. We assessed the variation in time spent doing in four types of PA (Work related PA, PA in and around home, transportation PA and recreation, sport, and leisure purpose) across different pandemic period. We also evaluated the sedentary time over the weekdays and on the weekends.ResultsA total of 1136 participants completed online assisted questionnaire. 71.4% were male, 83% of the study participants aged 18 to 35 years (mean = 29, (standard deviation = 7.79). Mean time spent doing vigorous PA as part of the work dropped from 84.5 minutes per day before COVID-19 to 58.6 minutes per day during lockdown and went back to 81.5 minutes per day after the lockdown. Time spent sitting on weekdays increased from 163 before COVID-19 to 244.5 minutes during lockdown and to 166.8 minutes after lockdown. Sitting time on weekend increased from 150 before COVID-19 to 235 minutes during lockdown and to 151 minutes after lockdown. Sleeping time on weekdays increased from 7.5 hours per day before COVID-19 to 9.9 hours during lockdown and to 7.5 hours after lockdown while it increased from 8 hours before COVID-19 to 10 hours during lockdown and to 8 hours per day after lockdown during weekends.ConclusionThe study emphasizes the significance of diverse PA, including home-based programs, during pandemics like COVID-19. It suggests promoting PA types like work-related, transportation, and domestic works during lockdown and similar period.

BackgroundEighty percent (80%) of global Non-Communicable Diseases attributed deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) with hypertension and diabetes being key contributors. The overall prevalence of hypertension was 15.3% the national prevalence of diabetes in rural and urban was 7.5 and 9.7%, respectively among 15–64 years. Hypertension represents a leading cause of death (43%) among hospitalized patients at the University teaching hospital of Kigali. This study aimed to identify ongoing population-level interventions targeting risk factors for diabetes and hypertension and to explore perceived barriers and facilitators for their implementation in Rwanda.MethodsThis situational analysis comprised a desk review, key informant interviews, and stakeholders' consultation. Ongoing population-level interventions were identified through searches of government websites, complemented by one-on-one consultations with 60 individuals nominated by their respective organizations involved with prevention efforts. Semi-structured interviews with purposively selected key informants sought to identify perceived barriers and facilitators for the implementation of population-level interventions. A consultative workshop with stakeholders was organized to validate and consolidate the findings.ResultsWe identified a range of policies in the areas of food and nutrition, physical activity promotion, and tobacco control. Supporting program and environment interventions were mainly awareness campaigns to improve knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward healthy eating, physical activity, and alcohol and tobacco use reduction, healthy food production, physical activity infrastructure, smoke-free areas, limits on tobacco production and bans on non-standardized alcohol production. Perceived barriers included limited stakeholder involvement, misbeliefs about ongoing interventions, insufficient funding, inconsistency in intervention implementation, weak policy enforcement, and conflicts between commercial and public health interests. Perceived facilitators were strengthened multi-sectoral collaboration and involvement in ongoing interventions, enhanced community awareness of ongoing interventions, special attention paid to the elderly, and increased funds for population-level interventions and policy enforcement.ConclusionThere are many ongoing population-level interventions in Rwanda targeting risk factors for diabetes and hypertension. Identified gaps, perceived barriers, and facilitators provide a useful starting point for strengthening efforts to address the significant burden of disease attributable to diabetes and hypertension.

Injuries in low-income and middle-income countries are prevalent and their number is expected to increase. Death and disability after injury can be reduced if people reach healthcare facilities in a timely manner. Knowledge of barriers to access to quality injury care is necessary to intervene to improve outcomes. We combined a four-delay framework with WHO Building Blocks and Institution of Medicine Quality Outcomes Frameworks to describe barriers to trauma care in three countries in sub-Saharan Africa: Ghana, South Africa and Rwanda. We used a parallel convergent mixed-methods research design, integrating the results to enable a holistic analysis of the barriers to access to quality injury care. Data were collected using surveys of patient experiences of injury care, interviews and focus group discussions with patients and community leaders, and a survey of policy-makers and healthcare leaders on the governance context for injury care. We identified 121 barriers across all three countries. Of these, 31 (25.6%) were shared across countries. More than half (18/31, 58%) were predominantly related to delay 3 (‘Delays to receiving quality care’). The majority of the barriers were captured using just one of the multiple methods, emphasising the need to use multiple methods to identify all barriers. Given there are many barriers to access to quality care for people who have been injured in Rwanda, Ghana and South Africa, but few of these are shared across countries, solutions to overcome these barriers may also be contextually dependent. This suggests the need for rigorous assessments of contexts using multiple data collection methods before developing interventions to improve access to quality care.

Objectives To understand commonalities and differences in injured patient experiences of accessing and receiving quality injury care across three lower-income and middle-income countries.Design A qualitative interview study. The interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed and thematically analysed.Setting Urban and rural settings in Ghana, South Africa and Rwanda.Participants 59 patients with musculoskeletal injuries.Results We found five common barriers and six common facilitators to injured patient experiences of accessing and receiving high-quality injury care. The barriers encompassed issues such as service and treatment availability, transportation challenges, apathetic care, individual financial scarcity and inadequate health insurance coverage, alongside low health literacy and information provision. Facilitators included effective information giving and informed consent practices, access to health insurance, improved health literacy, empathetic and responsive care, comprehensive multidisciplinary management and discharge planning, as well as both informal and formal transportation options including ambulance services. These barriers and facilitators were prevalent and shared across at least two countries but demonstrated intercountry and intracountry (between urbanity and rurality) variation in thematic frequency.Conclusion There are universal factors influencing patient experiences of accessing and receiving care, independent of the context or healthcare system. It is important to recognise and understand these barriers and facilitators to inform policy decisions and develop transferable interventions aimed at enhancing the quality of injury care in sub-Saharan African nations.