Medical Research Council of South Africa.

Background Maternal and neonatal mortality is high in Africa, but few large, prospective studies have been done to investigate the risk factors associated with these poor maternal and neonatal outcomes. Methods A 7-day, international, prospective, observational cohort study was done in patients having caesarean delivery in 183 hospitals across 22 countries in Africa. The inclusion criteria were all consecutive patients (aged ≥18 years) admitted to participating centres having elective and non-elective caesarean delivery during the 7-day study cohort period. To ensure a representative sample, each hospital had to provide data for 90% of the eligible patients during the recruitment week. The primary outcome was in-hospital maternal mortality and complications, which were assessed by local investigators. The study was registered on the South African National Health Research Database, number KZ_2015RP7_22, and on ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03044899. Findings Between February, 2016, and May, 2016, 3792 patients were recruited from hospitals across Africa. 3685 were included in the postoperative complications analysis (107 missing data) and 3684 were included in the maternal mortality analysis (108 missing data). These hospitals had a combined number of specialist surgeons, obstetricians, and anaesthetists totalling 0•7 per 100 000 population (IQR 0•2-2•0). Maternal mortality was 20 (0•5%) of 3684 patients (95% CI 0•3-0•8). Complications occurred in 633 (17•4%) of 3636 mothers (16•2-18•6), which were predominantly severe intraoperative and postoperative bleeding (136 [3•8%] of 3612 mothers). Maternal mortality was independently associated with a preoperative presentation of placenta praevia, placental abruption, ruptured uterus, antepartum haemorrhage (odds ratio 4•47 [95% CI 1•46-13•65]), and perioperative severe obstetric haemorrhage (5•87 [1•99-17•34]) or anaesthesia complications (11•47 (1•20-109•20]). Neonatal mortality was 153 (4•4%) of 3506 infants (95% CI 3•7-5•0). Interpretation Maternal mortality after caesarean delivery in Africa is 50 times higher than that of high-income countries and is driven by peripartum haemorrhage and anaesthesia complications. Neonatal mortality is double the global average. Early identification and appropriate management of mothers at risk of peripartum haemorrhage might improve maternal and neonatal outcomes in Africa.

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.

BACKGROUND: There is an unmet need for essential surgical services in Africa. Limited anesthesia services are a contributing factor. Nonphysician anesthesia providers are utilized to assist with providing anesthesia and procedural sedation to make essential surgeries available. There is a paucity of data on outcomes following procedural sedation for surgery in Africa. We investigated the postoperative outcomes following procedural sedation by nonphysicians and physicians in Africa. We hypothesized that the level of training of the sedation provider may be associated with the incidence of severe postoperative complications and death. METHODS: A secondary analysis of a prospective cohort of inhospital adult surgical patients representing 25 African countries was performed. The primary outcome was a collapsed composite of inhospital severe postoperative complications and death. We assessed the association between receiving procedural sedation conducted by a nonphysician (versus physician) and the composite outcome using logistic regression. We used the inverse probability of treatment weighting propensity score method to adjust for potential confounding variables including patient age, hemoglobin level, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physiological status, diabetes mellitus, urgency of surgery, severity of surgery, indication for surgery, surgical discipline, seniority of the surgical team, hospital level of specialization, and hospital funding system using public or private funding. All patients who only received procedural sedation for surgery were included. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-six patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 98 (29.2%) received sedation from a nonphysician provider. The incidence of severe postoperative complications and death was 10 of 98 (10.2%) in the nonphysician group and 5 of 238 (2.1%) in the physician group. The estimated association between procedural sedation conducted by a nonphysician provider and inhospital outcomes was an 8-fold increase in the odds of severe complications and/or death, with an odds ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 8.3 (2.7-25.6). CONCLUSIONS: The modest number of observations in this secondary data analysis suggests that shifting the task of procedural sedation from physicians to nonphysicians to increase access to care may be associated with severe postoperative complications and death in Africa. Research focusing on identifying factors contributing to adverse outcomes associated with procedural sedation is necessary to make this practice safer. (Anesth Analg 2022;135:250-63) KEY POINTS• Question: Is there a difference in patient safety when procedural sedation is conducted by nonphysicians or physicians in Africa? • Findings: This secondary analysis of the African Surgical Outcomes Study (ASOS) suggests an association with severe postoperative complications and death when procedural sedation is provided by a nonphysician in Africa. • Meaning: The health care environment in which procedural sedation is provided by nonphysicians in Afr...

No abstract