Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Disparate outcomes of global emergency surgery - A matched comparison of patients in developed and under—developed healthcare settings
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Disparate outcomes of global emergency surgery - A matched comparison of patients in developed and under—developed healthcare settings
Do you wish to request the book?
Disparate outcomes of global emergency surgery - A matched comparison of patients in developed and under—developed healthcare settings
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Disparate outcomes of global emergency surgery - A matched comparison of patients in developed and under—developed healthcare settings
2018
Overview
Access to surgical care is an essential element of health-systems strengthening. This study aims to compare two diverse healthcare settings in South Asia and the United States (US).
Patients at the Aga Khan University Hospital (AKUH), Pakistan were matched to patients captured in the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample (US-NIS) from 2009 to 2011. Risk-adjusted differences in mortality, major morbidity, and LOS were compared using logistic and generalized-linear (family gamma, link log) models after coarsened-exact matching.
A total of 2,244,486 patients (n = 4867 AKUH; n = 2,239,619 US-NIS) were included. Of those in the US-NIS, 990,963 (42.5%) were treated at urban-teaching hospitals, 332,568 (14.3%) in rural locations. Risk-adjusted odds of reported mortality were higher for Pakistani patients (OR[95%CI]: 3.80[2.68–5.37]), while odds of reported complications were lower (OR[95%CI]: 0.56[0.48–0.65]). No differences were observed in LOS. The difference in outcomes was less pronounced when comparing Pakistani patients to American rural patients.
These results demonstrate significant reported morbidity, mortality differences between healthcare systems. Comparative assessments such as this will inform global health policy development and support.
•Global surgery has long been recognized as the “neglected stepchild” of public health.•Southeast Asia, has the lowest number of optimally-equipped operating theatres.•This is a comparative analysis of a matched cohort of Pakistani and US emergency surgery patients.•Despite stark differences in outcomes, these were less pronounced when comparing Pakistani patients to rural US.•Comparative assessments such as this will inform global health policy development and support.
