Malnutrition represents a key priority for global health policy, yet the impact of nutritional state on cancer surgery worldwide remains poorly described. We aimed to analyse the effect of malnutrition on early postoperative outcomes following elective surgery for colorectal or gastric cancer. We did an international, multicentre, prospective cohort study of patients undergoing elective surgery for colorectal or gastric cancer between April 1, 2018, and Jan 31, 2019. Patients were excluded if the primary pathology was benign, they presented with cancer recurrence, or if they underwent emergency surgery (within 72 h of hospital admission). Malnutrition was defined with the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition criteria. The primary outcome was death or a major complication within 30 days of surgery. Multilevel logistic regression and a three-way mediation analysis were done to establish the relationship between country income group, nutritional status, and 30-day postoperative outcomes. This study included 5709 patients (4593 with colorectal cancer and 1116 with gastric cancer) from 381 hospitals in 75 countries. The mean age was 64·8 years (SD 13·5) and 2432 (42·6%) patients were female . Severe malnutrition was present in 1899 (33·3%) of 5709 patients, with a disproportionate burden in upper-middle-income countries (504 [44·4%] of 1135) and low-income and lower-middle-income countries (601 [62·5%] of 962). After adjustment for patient and hospital risk factors, severe malnutrition was associated with an increased risk of 30-day mortality across all country income groups (high income: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·96 [95% CI 1·14-3·37], p=0·015; upper-middle income: 3·05 [1·45-6·42], p=0·003; low income and lower-middle income: 11·57 [5·87-22·80], p<0·0001). Severe malnutrition mediated an estimated 32% of early deaths in low-income and lower-middle-income countries (aOR 1·41 [95% CI 1·22-1·64]) and an estimated 40% of early deaths in upper-middle-income countries (1·18 [1·08-1·30]). Severe malnutrition is common in patients undergoing surgery for gastrointestinal cancers and is a risk factor for 30-day mortality following elective surgery for colorectal or gastric cancer. There is an urgent need to examine whether perioperative nutritional interventions can improve early outcomes following gastrointestinal cancer surgery worldwide. National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit.

Background The large burden of injuries falls disproportionately on low/middle-income countries (LMICs). Health system interventions improve outcomes in high-income countries. Assessing LMIC trauma systems supports their improvement. Evaluating systems using a Three Delays framework, considering barriers to seeking (Delay 1), reaching (Delay 2) and receiving care (Delay 3), has aided maternal health gains. Rapid assessments allow timely appraisal within resource and logistically constrained settings. We systematically reviewed existing literature on the assessment of LMIC trauma systems, applying the Three Delays framework and rapid assessment principles. Methods We conducted a systematic review and narrative synthesis of articles assessing LMIC trauma systems. We searched seven databases and grey literature for studies and reports published until October 2018. Inclusion criteria were an injury care focus and assessment of at least one defined system aspect. We mapped each study to the Three Delays framework and judged its suitability for rapid assessment. Results Of 14 677 articles identified, 111 studies and 8 documents were included. Sub-Saharan Africa was the most commonly included region (44.1%). Delay 3, either alone or in combination, was most commonly assessed (79.3%) followed by Delay 2 (46.8%) and Delay 1 (10.8%). Facility assessment was the most common method of assessment (36.0%). Only 2.7% of studies assessed all Three Delays. We judged 62.6% of study methodologies potentially suitable for rapid assessment. Conclusions Whole health system injury research is needed as facility capacity assessments dominate. Future studies should consider novel or combined methods to study Delays 1 and 2, alongside care processes and outcomes.

Background: Whilst injuries are a major cause of disability and death worldwide, a large proportion of people in low‐ and middle‐income countries lack timely access to injury care. Barriers to accessing care from the point of injury to return to function have not been delineated.Methods: A two‐day workshop was held in Kigali, Rwanda in May 2019 with representation from health providers, academia, and government. A four delays model (delays to seeking, reaching, receiving, and remaining in care) was applied to injury care. Participants identified barriers at each delay and graded, through consensus, their relative importance. Following an iterative voting process, the four highest priority barriers were identified. Based on workshop findings and a scoping review, a map was created to visually represent injury care access as a complex health‐system problem.Results: Initially, 42 barriers were identified by the 34 participants. 19 barriers across all four delays were assigned high priority; highest‐priority barriers were “Training and retention of specialist staff”, “Health education/awareness of injury severity”, “Geographical coverage of referral trauma centres”, and “Lack of protocol for bypass to referral centres”. The literature review identified evidence relating to 14 of 19 high‐priority barriers. Most barriers were mapped to more than one of the four delays, visually represented in a complex health‐system map.Conclusion: Overcoming barriers to ensure access to quality injury care requires a multifaceted approach which considers the whole patient journey from injury to rehabilitation. Our results can guide researchers and policymakers planning future interventions.

Injuries in low-income and middle-income countries are prevalent and their number is expected to increase. Death and disability after injury can be reduced if people reach healthcare facilities in a timely manner. Knowledge of barriers to access to quality injury care is necessary to intervene to improve outcomes. We combined a four-delay framework with WHO Building Blocks and Institution of Medicine Quality Outcomes Frameworks to describe barriers to trauma care in three countries in sub-Saharan Africa: Ghana, South Africa and Rwanda. We used a parallel convergent mixed-methods research design, integrating the results to enable a holistic analysis of the barriers to access to quality injury care. Data were collected using surveys of patient experiences of injury care, interviews and focus group discussions with patients and community leaders, and a survey of policy-makers and healthcare leaders on the governance context for injury care. We identified 121 barriers across all three countries. Of these, 31 (25.6%) were shared across countries. More than half (18/31, 58%) were predominantly related to delay 3 (‘Delays to receiving quality care’). The majority of the barriers were captured using just one of the multiple methods, emphasising the need to use multiple methods to identify all barriers. Given there are many barriers to access to quality care for people who have been injured in Rwanda, Ghana and South Africa, but few of these are shared across countries, solutions to overcome these barriers may also be contextually dependent. This suggests the need for rigorous assessments of contexts using multiple data collection methods before developing interventions to improve access to quality care.

Objectives We used the process mapping method and Three Delays framework, to identify and visually represent the relationship between critical actions, decisions and barriers to access to care following injury in the Karonga health system, Northern Malawi. Design Facilitated group process mapping workshops with summary process mapping synthesis. Setting Process mapping workshops took place in 11 identified health system facilities (one per facility) providing injury care for a population in Karonga, Northern Malawi. Participants Fifty-four healthcare workers from various cadres took part. Results An overall injury health system summary map was created using those categories of action, decision and barrier that were sometimes or frequently reported. This provided a visual summary of the process following injury within the health system. For Delay 1 (seeking care) four barriers were most commonly described (by 8 of 11 facilities) these were ‘cultural norms’, ‘healthcare literacy’, ‘traditional healers’ and ‘police processes’. For Delay 2 (reaching care) the barrier most frequently described was ‘transport’—a lack of timely affordable emergency transport (formal or informal) described by all 11 facilities. For Delay 3 (receiving quality care) the most commonly reported barrier was that of ‘physical resources’ (9 of 11 facilities). Conclusions We found our novel approach combining several process mapping exercises to produce a summary map to be highly suited to rapid health system assessment identifying barriers to injury care, within a Three Delays framework. We commend the approach to others wishing to conduct rapid health system assessments in similar contexts.