Purpose of Review: Sub-Saharan Africa is a diverse context with a large burden of injury and trauma-related deaths. Relative to high-income contexts, most of the region is less mature in prehospital and facility-based trauma care, education and training, and trauma care quality assurance. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development recognizes rising inequalities, both within and between countries as a deterrent to growth and development. While disparities in access to trauma care between the region and HICs are more commonly described, internal disparities are equally concerning. We performed a narrative review of internal disparities in trauma care access using a previously described conceptual model. Recent Findings: A broad PubMed and EMBASE search from 2010 to 2021 restricted to 48 sub-Saharan African countries was performed. Records focused on disparities in access to trauma care were identified and mapped to de Jager’s four component framework. Search findings, input from contextual experts, comparisons based on other related research, and disaggregation of data helped inform the narrative. Only 21 studies were identified by formal search, with most focused on urban versus rural disparities in geographical access to trauma care. An additional 6 records were identified through citation searches and experts. Disparity in access to trauma care providers, detection of indications for trauma surgery, progression to trauma surgery, and quality care provision were thematically analyzed. No specific data on disparities in access to injury care for all four domains was available for more than half of the countries. From available data, socioeconomic status, geographical location, insurance, gender, and age were recognized disparity domains. South Africa has the most mature trauma systems. Across the region, high quality trauma care access is skewed towards the urban, insured, higher socioeconomic class adult. District hospitals are more poorly equipped and manned, and dedicated trauma centers, blood banks, and intensive care facilities are largely located within cities and in southern Africa. The largest geographical gaps in trauma care are presumably in central Africa, francophone West Africa, and conflict regions of East Africa. Disparities in trauma training opportunities, public–private disparities in provider availability, injury care provider migration, and several other factors contribute to this inequity. National trauma registries will play a role in internal inequity monitoring, and deliberate development implementation of National Surgical, Obstetrics, and Anesthesia plans will help address disparities. Human, systemic, and historical factors supporting these disparities including implicit and explicit bias must be clearly identified and addressed. Systems approaches, strategic trauma policy frameworks, and global and regional coalitions, as modelled by the Global Alliance for Care of the Injured and the Bellagio group, are key. Inequity in access can be reduced by prehospital initiatives, as used in Ghana, and community-based insurance, as modelled by Rwanda. Summary: Sub-Saharan African countries have underdeveloped trauma systems. Consistent in the narrative is the rural-urban disparity in trauma care access and the disadvantage of the poor. Further research is needed in view of data disparity. Recognition of these disparities should drive creative equitable solutions and focused interventions, partnerships, accompaniment, and action.

There is limited understanding of the role of transcultural, cross-site educational partnerships for global surgery training between high- and low- or middle-income country (LMIC) institutions. We describe the development, delivery, and appraisal of a hybrid, synchronous, semester-long Global Surgical Care course by global health collaborators from widely different contexts, and evaluate the equity of the collaboration. The course was collaboratively modified by surgical educators and public health professionals with emphasis on collaboration ethics. Faculty from high-income and LMICs were paired to deliver lectures. To collaborate internationally, students and faculty participated either onsite or online. Perceptions and knowledge gained were quantitatively evaluated through participant and faculty cross-sectional surveys, using Likert scales, prioritization rankings, and free text responses analysed qualitatively. Equity was assessed using the Fair Trade Learning rubric and additional probes. Thirty-five learners from six institutions participated. Teams produced mock National, Surgical, Obstetric, and Anaesthesia Plans (NSOAPs) for selected LMICs, and reported a 9% to 65% increase in self-reported global health competencies following the course. Online learners had favourable perceptions of learning, but experienced connectivity challenges. Barriers to effective group work included time differences and logistics of communication for dispersed team members. Individuals taking the course for academic credit scored significantly higher than other learners in peer assessments of participation (8.56±1.53 versus 5.03±3.14; p<0.001). Using the Fair Trade Rubric, 60% of equity indicators were ideal, and no respondents perceived neo-colonialism in the partnership. Blended, synchronous, interdisciplinary global surgery courses based on “North-South” partnerships with a focus on equity in design and delivery are feasible but require careful and deliberate planning to minimize epistemic injustice. Such programs should address surgical systems strengthening, and not create dependency. Equity in such engagements should be evaluated and monitored in an ongoing fashion to stimulate discussion and continuous improvement.

Access to equitable, safe, affordable, timely, and quality surgical healthcare in Africa remains limited. Few African countries have surgical healthcare plans or policies. Where these exist, there are significant gaps in dissemination, funding, and implementation. A Pan-African Surgical Healthcare Forum (PASHeF) was initiated to address this. The inaugural forum was a two-day consensus conference of technocrats from African Ministries of Health hosted by the Honorable Minister for Health of Rwanda in Kigali. Through coordinated discussions, plenary sessions, working groups, and technocrat networking, they charted the path forward for national surgical healthcare policies and plans. Discussions were sparked by country experiences, and working groups focused on curated context-specific, face-validated questions. Documentation involved field notes, audio recordings, and artificial intelligence transcription. Data was coded using a constant comparative method to itemize delegates’ observations, declarations, and recommendations, with member checking. A consensus statement was generated using an inclusive decision-making model. Thirty-two Ministries of Health were represented by 42 delegates who drafted and unanimously adopted the PASHeF 2023 Consensus Statement. This was a 50-point consensus addressing country commitment, leadership, financing, stakeholder mobilization, monitoring and evaluation, partnerships, and other aspects of national surgical healthcare planning in Africa. This consensus is the African roadmap and emphasizes implementation, the need for flexibility in policy development, and current opportunities and barriers. It emphasizes that community involvement and sustainability should undergird this planning, in addition to a focus on the entire spectrum of surgical healthcare, including prevention and rehabilitation. Delegates endorsed PASHeF as an annual event with a secretariat and recommended the creation of a Pan-African Surgical Healthcare Policy monitoring system, and that issues of surgical healthcare should be escalated as an agenda item on African Union and sub-regional ministerial meetings. African nations have embraced surgical healthcare policy as an imperative on their journey towards Universal Health Coverage.