Search

Background: Lack of access to emergency and essential surgery is widespread in low- and middle-income countries. Scarce anesthesia services contribute to this unmet need. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the Every Second Matters for Emergency and Essential Surgery-Ketamine (ESM-Ketamine) package for emergency and essential procedures when no anesthetist was available. Methods: From November 2013 to September 2017, the ESM-Ketamine package was used for patients requiring emergency or life-improving surgeries in fifteen selected facilities across Kenya when no anesthetist was available. A mixed-methods approach was used to assess safety and feasibility of the ESM-Ketamine package, including demand, acceptability, and practicality. The primary outcome was ketamine-related adverse events. Key-informant interviews captured perceptions of providers, hospital administrators, and surgeons/proceduralists. Results: Non-anesthetist mid-level providers used ESM-Ketamine for 1216 surgical procedures across the fifteen study facilities. The median ketamine dose was 2.1 mg/kg. Brief (<30 s) oxygen desaturations occurred in 39 patients (3%), and prolonged (>30 s) oxygen desaturations occurred in seven patients (0.6%). There were 157 (13%) reported cases of hallucinations and agitation which were treated with diazepam. All patients recovered uneventfully, and no ketamine-related deaths were reported. Twenty-seven key-informant interviews showed strong support for the program with four main themes: financial considerations, provision of services, staff impact, and scaling considerations. Conclusions: The ESM-Ketamine package appears safe and feasible and is capable of expanding access to emergency and essential surgeries in rural Kenya when no anesthetist is available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As global emergency care grows, practical and effective performance measures are needed to ensure high quality care. Our objective was to systematically catalog and classify metrics that have been used to measure the quality of emergency care in resource-limited settings. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and the gray literature using standardized terms. The references of included articles were also reviewed. Two researchers screened titles and abstracts for relevance; full text was then reviewed by three researchers. A structured data extraction tool was used to identify and classify metrics into one of six Institute of Medicine (IOM) quality domains (safe, timely, efficient, effective, equitable, patient-centered) and one of three of Donabedian's structure/process/outcome categories. A fourth expert reviewer blinded to the initial classifications re-classified all indicators, with a weighted kappa of 0.89. Results: A total of 1705 articles were screened, 95 received full text review, and 34 met inclusion criteria. One hundred eighty unique metrics were identified, predominantly process (57 %) and structure measures (27 %); 16 % of metrics were related to outcomes. Most metrics evaluated the effectiveness (52 %) and timeliness (28 %) of care, with few addressing the patient centeredness (11 %), safety (4 %), resource-efficiency (3 %), or equitability (1 %) of care. Conclusions: The published quality metrics in emergency care in resource-limited settings primarily focus on the effectiveness and timeliness of care. As global emergency care is built and strengthened, outcome-based measures and those focused on the safety, efficiency, and equitability of care need to be developed and studied to improve quality of care and resource utilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The corrected order of the authors is as reflected in this erratum. Sebastian Suarez and Ayla Senay are co-second authors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to an article dealing with need for global fund for science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education.