The increased risk of POI and length of hospitalization posed by postoperative hyperglycemia is independent of diabetic status and needs further evaluation to assess for possible benefits of postoperative glycemic control in patients who have undergone general surgery.

Specialist hand surgeons are distributed unevenly across the United States. State-level analyses suggest that states with lower per capita incomes may be particularly underserved, which may contribute to regional disparities in access to emergency hand trauma care.

Cleft lip and palate (CLP) care is the longest sustained global effort in humanitarian surgical care. However, the relative cost-effectiveness of surgical delivery approaches remains largely unknown. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of two strategies of CLP surgical care delivery in low resource settings: medical mission and comprehensive care center. We evaluated the medical records and costs for 17 India-based medical missions and a Comprehensive Cleft Care Center in Guwahati, India, from Operation Smile, a humanitarian nongovernmental organization. Age, sex, diagnosis, and procedures were extracted and cost/Disability-Adjusted Life Year (DALY) averted was calculated using a provider's perspective. The disability weights for CLP from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2010 update were used as the reference case. Sensitivity analysis was performed using various disability weights, age-weighting, discounting, and cost perspective. The medical missions treated 3503 patients for first-time cleft procedures and averted 6.00 DALYs per intervention with a cost-effectiveness of $247.42/DALY. The care center cohort included 2778 patients with first-time operations for CLP and averted a mean of 5.96 DALYs per intervention with a cost-effectiveness of $189.81/DALY. The Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) of choosing medical mission over care center is $462.55. The care center provides cleft care with a higher cost-effectiveness, although both models are highly cost-effective in India, in accordance with WHO guidelines. Compared to other global health interventions, cleft care is very cost-effective and investment in cleft surgery might be realistic and achievable in similar resource-constrained environments.

BackgroundSurgical interventions are being increasingly recognized as cost-effective global priorities, the utility of which are frequently measured using either quality-adjusted (QALY) or disability-adjusted (DALY) life years. The objectives of this study were to: (1) identify surgical cost-effectiveness studies that utilized a formulation of the QALY or DALY as a summary measure, (2) report on global patterns of QALY and DALY use in surgery and the income characteristics of the countries and/or regions involved, and (3) assess for possible associations between national/regional-income levels and the relative prominence of either measure.Study DesignPRISMA-guided systematic review of surgical cost-effectiveness studies indexed in PubMed or EMBASE prior to December 15, 2014, that used the DALY and/or QALY as a summary measure. National locations were used to classify publications based on the 2014 World Bank income stratification scheme into: low-, lower-middle-, upper-middle-, or high-income countries. Differences in QALY/DALY use were considered by income level as well as for differences in geographic location and year using descriptive statistics (two-sided Chi-squared tests, Fischer’s exact tests in cell counts <5).ResultsA total of 540 publications from 128 countries met inclusion criteria, representing 825 “national studies” (regional publications included data from multiple countries). Data for 69.0% (569/825) were reported using QALYs (2.1% low-, 1.2% lower-middle-, 4.4% upper-middle-, and 92.3% high-income countries), compared to 31.0% (256/825) reported using DALYs (46.9% low-, 31.6% lower-middle-, 16.8% upper-middle-, and 4.7% high-income countries) (p<0.001). Studies from the US and the UK dominated the total number of QALY studies (49.9%) and were themselves almost exclusively QALY-based. DALY use, in contrast, was the most common in Africa and Asia. While prominent published use of QALYs (1990s) in surgical cost-effectiveness studies began approximately 10 years earlier than DALYs (2000s), the use of both measures continues to increase.ConclusionAs global prioritization of surgical interventions gains prominence, it will be important to consider the comparative implications of summary measure use. The results of this study demonstrate significant income- and geographic-based differences in the preferential utilization of the QALY and DALY for surgical cost-effectiveness studies. Such regional variation holds important implications for efforts to interpret and utilize global health policy research. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015015991