Cargando…
Validating the Global Surgery Geographical Accessibility Indicator: Differences in Modeled Versus Patient-Reported Travel Times
BACKGROUND: Since long travel times to reach health facilities are associated with worse outcomes, geographic accessibility is one of the six core global surgery indicators; this corresponds to the second of the “Three Delays Framework,” namely “delay in reaching a health facility.” Most attempts to...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7266844/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32274536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-020-05480-8 |
_version_ | 1783541383044268032 |
---|---|
author | Rudolfson, Niclas Gruendl, Magdalena Nkurunziza, Theoneste Kateera, Frederick Sonderman, Kristin Nihiwacu, Edison Ramadhan, Bahati Riviello, Robert Hedt-Gauthier, Bethany |
author_facet | Rudolfson, Niclas Gruendl, Magdalena Nkurunziza, Theoneste Kateera, Frederick Sonderman, Kristin Nihiwacu, Edison Ramadhan, Bahati Riviello, Robert Hedt-Gauthier, Bethany |
author_sort | Rudolfson, Niclas |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Since long travel times to reach health facilities are associated with worse outcomes, geographic accessibility is one of the six core global surgery indicators; this corresponds to the second of the “Three Delays Framework,” namely “delay in reaching a health facility.” Most attempts to estimate this indicator have been based on geographical information systems (GIS) algorithms. The aim of our study was to compare GIS derived estimates to self-reported travel times for patients traveling to a district hospital in rural Rwanda for emergency obstetric care. METHODS: Our study includes 664 women who traveled to undergo a Cesarean delivery in Kirehe, Rwanda. We compared self-reported travel time from home to the hospital (excluding waiting time) with GIS estimated travel times, which were computed using the World Health Organization tool AccessMod, using linear regression. RESULTS: The majority of patients used multiple modes of transportation (walking = 48.5%, public transport = 74.2%, private transport = 2.9%, and ambulance 70.6%). Self-reported times were longer than GIS estimates by a factor of 1.49 (95% CI 1.40–1.57). Concordance was higher when the GIS model took into account that all patients in Rwanda are referred via their health center (β = 1.12; 95% CI 1.05–1.18). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, in this largest to date GIS validation study for geographical access to healthcare in low- and middle-income countries, a standard GIS model was found to significantly underestimate real travel time, which likely is in part because it does not model the actual route patients are travelling. Therefore, previous studies of 2-h access to surgery will need to be interpreted with caution, and future studies should take local travelling conditions into account. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00268-020-05480-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7266844 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72668442020-06-12 Validating the Global Surgery Geographical Accessibility Indicator: Differences in Modeled Versus Patient-Reported Travel Times Rudolfson, Niclas Gruendl, Magdalena Nkurunziza, Theoneste Kateera, Frederick Sonderman, Kristin Nihiwacu, Edison Ramadhan, Bahati Riviello, Robert Hedt-Gauthier, Bethany World J Surg Surgery in Low and Middle Income Countries BACKGROUND: Since long travel times to reach health facilities are associated with worse outcomes, geographic accessibility is one of the six core global surgery indicators; this corresponds to the second of the “Three Delays Framework,” namely “delay in reaching a health facility.” Most attempts to estimate this indicator have been based on geographical information systems (GIS) algorithms. The aim of our study was to compare GIS derived estimates to self-reported travel times for patients traveling to a district hospital in rural Rwanda for emergency obstetric care. METHODS: Our study includes 664 women who traveled to undergo a Cesarean delivery in Kirehe, Rwanda. We compared self-reported travel time from home to the hospital (excluding waiting time) with GIS estimated travel times, which were computed using the World Health Organization tool AccessMod, using linear regression. RESULTS: The majority of patients used multiple modes of transportation (walking = 48.5%, public transport = 74.2%, private transport = 2.9%, and ambulance 70.6%). Self-reported times were longer than GIS estimates by a factor of 1.49 (95% CI 1.40–1.57). Concordance was higher when the GIS model took into account that all patients in Rwanda are referred via their health center (β = 1.12; 95% CI 1.05–1.18). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, in this largest to date GIS validation study for geographical access to healthcare in low- and middle-income countries, a standard GIS model was found to significantly underestimate real travel time, which likely is in part because it does not model the actual route patients are travelling. Therefore, previous studies of 2-h access to surgery will need to be interpreted with caution, and future studies should take local travelling conditions into account. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00268-020-05480-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2020-04-09 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7266844/ /pubmed/32274536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-020-05480-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Surgery in Low and Middle Income Countries Rudolfson, Niclas Gruendl, Magdalena Nkurunziza, Theoneste Kateera, Frederick Sonderman, Kristin Nihiwacu, Edison Ramadhan, Bahati Riviello, Robert Hedt-Gauthier, Bethany Validating the Global Surgery Geographical Accessibility Indicator: Differences in Modeled Versus Patient-Reported Travel Times |
title | Validating the Global Surgery Geographical Accessibility Indicator: Differences in Modeled Versus Patient-Reported Travel Times |
title_full | Validating the Global Surgery Geographical Accessibility Indicator: Differences in Modeled Versus Patient-Reported Travel Times |
title_fullStr | Validating the Global Surgery Geographical Accessibility Indicator: Differences in Modeled Versus Patient-Reported Travel Times |
title_full_unstemmed | Validating the Global Surgery Geographical Accessibility Indicator: Differences in Modeled Versus Patient-Reported Travel Times |
title_short | Validating the Global Surgery Geographical Accessibility Indicator: Differences in Modeled Versus Patient-Reported Travel Times |
title_sort | validating the global surgery geographical accessibility indicator: differences in modeled versus patient-reported travel times |
topic | Surgery in Low and Middle Income Countries |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7266844/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32274536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-020-05480-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rudolfsonniclas validatingtheglobalsurgerygeographicalaccessibilityindicatordifferencesinmodeledversuspatientreportedtraveltimes AT gruendlmagdalena validatingtheglobalsurgerygeographicalaccessibilityindicatordifferencesinmodeledversuspatientreportedtraveltimes AT nkurunzizatheoneste validatingtheglobalsurgerygeographicalaccessibilityindicatordifferencesinmodeledversuspatientreportedtraveltimes AT kateerafrederick validatingtheglobalsurgerygeographicalaccessibilityindicatordifferencesinmodeledversuspatientreportedtraveltimes AT sondermankristin validatingtheglobalsurgerygeographicalaccessibilityindicatordifferencesinmodeledversuspatientreportedtraveltimes AT nihiwacuedison validatingtheglobalsurgerygeographicalaccessibilityindicatordifferencesinmodeledversuspatientreportedtraveltimes AT ramadhanbahati validatingtheglobalsurgerygeographicalaccessibilityindicatordifferencesinmodeledversuspatientreportedtraveltimes AT riviellorobert validatingtheglobalsurgerygeographicalaccessibilityindicatordifferencesinmodeledversuspatientreportedtraveltimes AT hedtgauthierbethany validatingtheglobalsurgerygeographicalaccessibilityindicatordifferencesinmodeledversuspatientreportedtraveltimes |