Background: The African Surgical Outcomes Study (ASOS) showed that surgical patients in Africa have a mortality twice the global average. Existing risk assessment tools are not valid for use in this population because the pattern of risk for poor outcomes differs from high-income countries. The objective of this study was to derive and validate a simple, preoperative risk stratification tool to identify African surgical patients at risk for in-hospital postoperative mortality and severe complications. Methods: ASOS was a 7-day prospective cohort study of adult patients undergoing surgery in Africa. The ASOS Surgical Risk Calculator was constructed with a multivariable logistic regression model for the outcome of in-hospital mortality and severe postoperative complications. The following preoperative risk factors were entered into the model; age, sex, smoking status, ASA physical status, preoperative chronic comorbid conditions, indication for surgery, urgency, severity, and type of surgery. Results: The model was derived from 8799 patients from 168 African hospitals. The composite outcome of severe postoperative complications and death occurred in 423/8799 (4.8%) patients. The ASOS Surgical Risk Calculator includes the following risk factors: age, ASA physical status, indication for surgery, urgency, severity, and type of surgery. The model showed good discrimination with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.805 and good calibration with c-statistic corrected for optimism of 0.784. Conclusions: This simple preoperative risk calculator could be used to identify high-risk surgical patients in African hospitals and facilitate increased postoperative surveillance. Clinical trial registration: NCT03044899.
SummaryDeaths following surgery are the third largest contributor to deaths globally, and in Africa are twice the global average. There is a need for a peri‐operative research agenda to ensure co‐ordinated, collaborative research efforts across Africa in order to decrease peri‐operative mortality. The objective was to determine the top 10 research priorities for peri‐operative research in Africa. A Delphi technique was used to establish consensus on the top research priorities. The top 10 research priorities identified were (1) Develop training standards for peri‐operative healthcare providers (surgical, anaesthesia and nursing) in Africa; (2) Develop minimum provision of care standards for peri‐operative healthcare providers (surgical, anaesthesia and nursing) in Africa; (3) Early identification and management of mothers at risk from peripartum haemorrhage in the peri‐operative period; (4) The role of communication and teamwork between surgical, anaesthetic, nursing and other teams involved in peri‐operative care; (5) A facility audit/African World Health Organization situational analysis tool audit to assess emergency and essential surgical care, which includes anaesthetic equipment available and level of training and knowledge of peri‐operative healthcare providers (surgeons, anaesthetists and nurses); (6) Establishing evidence‐based practice guidelines for peri‐operative physicians in Africa; (7) Economic analysis of strategies to finance access to surgery in Africa; (8) Establishment of a minimum dataset surgical registry; (9) A quality improvement programme to improve implementation of the surgical safety checklist; and (10) Peri‐operative outcomes associated with emergency surgery. These peri‐operative research priorities provide the structure for an intermediate‐term research agenda to improve peri‐operative outcomes across Africa.
Summary Background Risk of mortality following surgery in patients across Africa is twice as high as the global average. Most of these deaths occur on hospital wards after the surgery itself. We aimed to assess whether enhanced postoperative surveillance of adult surgical patients at high risk of postoperative morbidity or mortality in Africa could reduce 30-day in-hospital mortality. Methods We did a two-arm, open-label, cluster-randomised trial of hospitals (clusters) across Africa. Hospitals were eligible if they provided surgery with an overnight postoperative admission. Hospitals were randomly assigned through minimisation in recruitment blocks (1:1) to provide patients with either a package of enhanced postoperative surveillance interventions (admitting the patient to higher care ward, increasing the frequency of postoperative nursing observations, assigning the patient to a bed in view of the nursing station, allowing family members to stay in the ward, and placing a postoperative surveillance guide at the bedside) for those at high risk (ie, with African Surgical Outcomes Study Surgical Risk Calculator scores ≥10) and usual care for those at low risk (intervention group), or for all patients to receive usual postoperative care (control group). Health-care providers and participants were not masked, but data assessors were. The primary outcome was 30-day in-hospital mortality of patients at low and high risk, measured at the participant level. All analyses were done as allocated (by cluster) in all patients with available data. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03853824 . Findings Between May 3, 2019, and July 27, 2020, 594 eligible hospitals indicated a desire to participate across 33 African countries; 332 (56%) were able to recruit participants and were included in analyses. We allocated 160 hospitals (13 275 patients) to provide enhanced postoperative surveillance and 172 hospitals (15 617 patients) to provide standard care. The mean age of participants was 37·1 years (SD 15·5) and 20 039 (69·4%) of 28 892 patients were women. 30-day in-hospital mortality occurred in 169 (1·3%) of 12 970 patients with mortality data in the intervention group and in 193 (1·3%) of 15 242 patients with mortality data in the control group (relative risk 0·96, 95% CI 0·69–1·33; p=0·79). 45 (0·2%) of 22 031 patients at low risk and 309 (5·6%) of 5500 patients at high risk died. No harms associated with either intervention were reported. Interpretation This intervention package did not decrease 30-day in-hospital mortality among surgical patients in Africa at high risk of postoperative morbidity or mortality. Further research is needed to develop interventions that prevent death from surgical complications in resource-limited hospitals across Africa. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Federati...
Background: When the sebaceous follicle is damaged during acne inflammation, improper healing can occur, resulting in scarring. There are two types of acne scars: atrophic and hypertrophic. Atrophic scars can be further classified as rolling scars, icepick scars, or boxcar scars. Chemical peels, dermabrasion, microneedling, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), as well as the punch elevation technique are only few of the methods utilized to treat these scars. Objective: Assessment of use of microneedling with platelet rich plasma for management of atrophic post-acne scars. Methods: We scoured medical publications and databases including PubMed, Google Scholar, and Science Direct for information on Platelet Rich Plasma and Atrophic Post-Acne Scars between October 2000 and March 2021. However, only the latest or most comprehensive study was considered. The authors also assessed the usefulness of references drawn from similar books. Non-English documents have been overlooked due to a lack of resources to translate them. It was commonly recognised that scientific research did not include things like unpublished publications, oral presentations, conference abstracts, or dissertations. Conclusion: Atrophic acne scars can be treated with microneedling as well as fractional CO2 laser, but platelet-rich plasma has also been used on its own with positive results. Incorporating PRP into skin microneedling has decreased recovery time and toxicity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.