METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study conducted on specialist medical reports written from 2009 to 2019, involving patients who survived after TBI from RTA. The functional outcome was assessed using the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE). Factors associated with good outcome were analysed via logistic regression analysis. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to derive the best fitting Prediction Model and split-sample cross-validation was performed to develop a prediction model.
RESULTS: A total of 1939 reports were evaluated. The mean age of the study participants was 32.4 ± 13.7 years. Most patients were male, less than 40, and with average post RTA of two years. Good outcome (GOSE score 7 & 8) was reported in 30.3% of the patients. Factors significantly affecting functional outcome include age, gender, ethnicity, marital status, education level, severity of brain injury, neurosurgical intervention, ICU admission, presence of inpatient complications, cognitive impairment, post-traumatic headache, post traumatic seizures, presence of significant behavioural issue; and residence post discharge (p<0.05). After adjusting for confounding factors, prediction model identified age less than 40, mild TBI, absence of post traumatic seizure, absence of behaviour issue, absence of cognitive impairment and independent living post TBI as significant predictors of good functional outcome post trauma. Discrimination of the model was acceptable (C-statistic, 0.67; p<0.001, 95% CI: 0.62-0.73).
CONCLUSION: Good functional outcome following TBI due to RTA in this study population is comparable to other low to middle income countries but lower than high income countries. Factors influencing outcome such as seizure, cognitive and behavioural issues, and independent living post injury should be addressed early to achieve favourable long-term outcomes.
METHODS: The World Health Organization (WHO) aims to extend UHC to a further 1 billion people by 2023, yet evidence supporting improved emergency care coverage is lacking. In this article, we explore four phases of a research prioritisation setting (RPS) exercise conducted by researchers and stakeholders from South Africa, Egypt, Nepal, Jamaica, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Colombia, Ethiopia, Iran, Jordan, Malaysia, South Korea and Phillipines, USA and UK as a key step in gathering evidence required by policy makers and practitioners for the strengthening of emergency care systems in limited-resource settings.
RESULTS: The RPS proposed seven priority research questions addressing: identification of context-relevant emergency care indicators, barriers to effective emergency care; accuracy and impact of triage tools; potential quality improvement via registries; characteristics of people seeking emergency care; best practices for staff training and retention; and cost effectiveness of critical care - all within LMICs.
CONCLUSIONS: Convened by WHO and facilitated by the University of Sheffield, the Global Emergency Care Research Network project (GEM-CARN) brought together a coalition of 16 countries to identify research priorities for strengthening emergency care in LMICs. Our article further assesses the quality of the RPS exercise and reviews the current evidence supporting the identified priorities.
METHODS: Data from the World Health Survey conducted in 2002-2004, across 70 low-, middle- and high-income countries was used. Participants aged 18 years and over were selected using multistage, stratified cluster sampling. BMI was used as outcome variable. The potential determinants of individual-level BMI were participants' sex, age, marital-status, education, occupation, household-wealth and location(rural/urban) at the individual-level. The country-level factors used were average national income (GNI-PPP) and income inequality (Gini-index). A two-level random-intercepts and fixed-slopes model structure with individuals nested within countries was fitted, treating BMI as a continuous outcome.
RESULTS: The weighted mean BMI and standard-error of the 206,266 people from 70-countries was 23.90 (4.84). All the low-income countries were below the 25.0 mean BMI level and most of the high-income countries were above. All wealthier quintiles of household-wealth had higher scores in BMI than lowest quintile. Each USD10000 increase in GNI-PPP was associated with a 0.4 unit increase in BMI. The Gini-index was not associated with BMI. All these variables explained 28.1% of country-level, 4.9% of individual-level and 7.7% of total variance in BMI. The cross-level interaction effect between GNI-PPP and household-wealth was significant. BMI increased as the GNI-PPP increased in first four quintiles of household-wealth. However, the BMI of the wealthiest people decreased as the GNI-PPP increased.
CONCLUSION: Both individual-level and country-level factors made an independent contribution to the BMI of the people. Household-wealth and national-income had significant interaction effects.