Suchergebnisse

Introduction: An estimated five billion people lack access to safe surgical care across the globe. Traditionally, providing short-term surgical missions has been the main strategy for health professionals from high-income countries to support surgical care in low- and middle-income countries. However, traditional missions have come under criticism because evidence of their sustainable value is lacking, along with any robust documentation and application of recommendations by participants of ongoing surgical missions. Using survey data collection and analysis, this study aims to provide a framework on how to improve the use of visiting surgical teams to strengthen surgical services in resource-poor settings. Method: An online survey was conducted among members of foreign teams to collect data on five specific areas: basic characteristics of the mission, main activities. Follow-up and reporting, the local registration process and collaboration with local actors. The survey included 58 respondents from 13 countries, and representing 20 organizations. Results: During surgical missions, training activities were considered most impactful, and reporting on outcome/s, along with long-term follow-up was strongly recommended. According to almost all participants (94%), the focus should be on establishing collaborative practices with local actors, and encourage strategic, long-term changes under their leadership. Conclusion: Building sustainable partnerships within local healthcare systems is the way forward for foreign surgical parties that aim to improve surgical care in low- and- middle income countries. When foreign help is offered, local stakeholders should be in the lead.

Objective: Human and Organizational Factors (HOF) studies in health technology involve human beings and thus require Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval. Yet HOF studies have specific constraints and methods that may not fit standard regulations and IRB practices. Gaining IRB approval may pose difficulties for HOF researchers. This paper aims to provide a first overview of HOF study challenges to get IRB review by exploring differences and best practices across different countries. Methods: HOF researchers were contacted by email to provide a testimony about their experience with IRB review and approval. Testimonies were thematically analyzed and synthesized to identify and discuss shared themes. Results: Researchers from seven European countries, Argentina, Canada, Australia, and the United States answered the call. Four themes emerged that indicate shared challenges in legislation, IRB inefficiencies and inconsistencies, general regulation and costs, and lack of HOF study knowledge by IRB members. We propose a model for IRB review of HOF studies based on best practices. Conclusion: International criteria are needed that define low and high-risk HOF studies, to allow identification of studies that can undergo an expedited (or exempted) process from those that need full IRB review. Enhancing IRB processes in such a way would be beneficial to the conduct of HOF studies. Greater knowledge and promotion of HOF methods and evidence-based HOF study designs may support the evolving discipline. Based on these insights, training and guidance to IRB members may be developed to support them in ensuring that appropriate ethical issues for HOF studies are considered.