Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31331348›Full record

Trial reportHuman resources for health2019

The contribution of non-physician clinicians to the provision of surgery in rural Zambia-a randomised controlled trial.

Jakub Gajewski, Mweene Cheelo, Leon Bijlmakers, John Kachimba, Chiara Pittalis, Ruairi Brugha

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Human resources for health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Developing the health workforce for universal health coverage.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2020
    Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Jakub GajewskiInstitute of Global Surgery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St Stephens Green, Dublin 2, Ireland. jakubgajewski@rcsi.ie.ORCID 0000-0003-0440-6051
Mweene CheeloDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Society of Zambia, University Teaching Hospital, P.O. Box, 50110, Lusaka, Zambia.
Leon BijlmakersRadboud University Medical Centre Netherlands, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
John KachimbaDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Society of Zambia, University Teaching Hospital, P.O. Box, 50110, Lusaka, Zambia.
Chiara PittalisDivision of Population Health Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St Stephens Green, Dublin 2, Ireland.
Ruairi BrughaDivision of Population Health Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St Stephens Green, Dublin 2, Ireland.
Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland · IEUniversity Teaching Hospital · ZMRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development Grant 266417Horizon 2020 733391
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe global shortage of surgeons disproportionately impacts low- and middle-income countries. To mitigate this, Zambia introduced a 'task-shifting' solution and started to train non-physician clinicians (NPCs) called medical licentiates (ML) to perform surgery. The aim of this randomised controlled trial was to assess their contribution to the delivery of surgical care in rural hospitals in Zambia.

methodsSixteen hospitals were randomly assigned to intervention and control arms of the study. Nine MLs were deployed to eight intervention sites. Crude numbers of selected major surgical procedures between intervention and control sites were compared before and after the intervention. Volume and outcomes of surgery were compared within intervention hospitals, between NPCs and surgically active medical doctors (MDs).

resultsThere was a significant increase in the numbers of caesarean sections (CS) in the intervention hospitals (+ 15.2%) and a drop by almost half in the control group (- 47%) (P = 0.015), between the two time periods. There were marginal shifts in the numbers of index procedures: a small drop in the intervention group (- 4.9%) and slight increase in the control arm (+ 4.8%) (P = 0.505). In all pairs, MLs had higher mean number of CS and other major surgical cases done in the intervention period compared with MDs. There was no significant difference in postoperative wound infection rates for CS (P = 0.884) and other major surgical cases (P = 0.33) at intervention hospitals between MLs and MDs.

conclusionThis study provided evidence that the ML training programme in Zambia is an effective and safe way to bridge the gap in rural hospitals between the demand and the limited availability of surgically trained workforce in the country. Such evidence is greatly needed as more developing countries are developing national surgical plans.

trial registrationISRCTN66099597 Registered: 07/01/2014.

Indexed as

Allied Health PersonnelClinical CompetenceDelegation, ProfessionalDeveloping CountriesHealth WorkforceHumansRural PopulationSurgical Procedures, OperativeZambiaClinical officersGlobal surgeryHernia repairMalawiMedical licentiatesNon-physician cliniciansPatient outcomesSurgeryTask-shiftingZambia

Identifiers

PMID31331348
PMCPMC6647149
OpenAlexW2964174138

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.