Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30728037›Full record

Trial reportBMC health services research2019

Operative volume and surgical case distribution in Uganda's public sector: a stratified randomized evaluation of nationwide surgical capacity.

Katherine Albutt, Maria Punchak, Peter Kayima, Didacus B Namanya, Mark G Shrime

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Katherine AlbuttProgram in Global Surgery and Social Change, Harvard Medical School, 641 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. katherine.albutt@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1735-7316
Maria PunchakProgram in Global Surgery and Social Change, Harvard Medical School, 641 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. mary.punchak@gmail.com.
Peter KayimaMbarara University of Science and Technology, Mbarara, Uganda.
Didacus B NamanyaMinistry of Health, Kampala, Uganda.
Mark G ShrimeProgram in Global Surgery and Social Change, Harvard Medical School, 641 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLittle is known about operative volume, distribution of cases, or capacity of the public sector to deliver essential surgical services in Uganda.

methodsA standardized mixed-methods surgical assessment and retrospective operative logbook review were completed at 16 randomly selected public hospitals serving 64·0% of Uganda's population.

resultsA total of 3014 operations were recorded, annualizing to a surgical volume of 36,670 cases/year or 144·5 operations/100,000people/year. Absolute surgical volume was greater at regional referral than general hospitals (p < 0·001); but, relative surgical volume/catchment population was greater at the general versus regional level (p = 0·03). Most patients undergoing operations were women (78·3%) with a mean age of 26·9 years. The overall case distribution was 69·0% obstetrics/gynecology, 23·7% general surgery, 4·0% orthopedics, and 3·3% other subspecialties. Cesarean sections were the most common operation (55·8%). Monthly operative volume was strongly predicted by number of surgical, anesthetic, and obstetric physician providers (훽=10·72, p = 0·005, R

conclusionAn understanding of operative case volume and distribution is essential in facilitating targeted interventions to strengthen surgical capacity. These data suggest that surgical workforce is the critical driver of operative volume in the Ugandan public sector. Investment in the surgical workforce is imperative to ensure access to safe, timely, and affordable surgical and anaesthesia care.

Indexed as

AdultAnesthesiologyFemaleHospitals, PublicHumansMaleOrthopedicsPhysiciansPublic SectorReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesSurgical Procedures, OperativeUgandaWorkloadCase distributionGlobal surgeryOperative volumeSurgical workforceUganda

Identifiers

PMID30728037
PMCPMC6366061

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.