Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common infections associated with health care, but its importance as a global health priority is not fully understood. We quantified the burden of SSI after gastrointestinal surgery in countries in all parts of the world. This international, prospective, multicentre cohort study included consecutive patients undergoing elective or emergency gastrointestinal resection within 2-week time periods at any health-care facility in any country. Countries with participating centres were stratified into high-income, middle-income, and low-income groups according to the UN's Human Development Index (HDI). Data variables from the GlobalSurg 1 study and other studies that have been found to affect the likelihood of SSI were entered into risk adjustment models. The primary outcome measure was the 30-day SSI incidence (defined by US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria for superficial and deep incisional SSI). Relationships with explanatory variables were examined using Bayesian multilevel logistic regression models. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02662231. Between Jan 4, 2016, and July 31, 2016, 13 265 records were submitted for analysis. 12 539 patients from 343 hospitals in 66 countries were included. 7339 (58·5%) patient were from high-HDI countries (193 hospitals in 30 countries), 3918 (31·2%) patients were from middle-HDI countries (82 hospitals in 18 countries), and 1282 (10·2%) patients were from low-HDI countries (68 hospitals in 18 countries). In total, 1538 (12·3%) patients had SSI within 30 days of surgery. The incidence of SSI varied between countries with high (691 [9·4%] of 7339 patients), middle (549 [14·0%] of 3918 patients), and low (298 [23·2%] of 1282) HDI (p<0·001). The highest SSI incidence in each HDI group was after dirty surgery (102 [17·8%] of 574 patients in high-HDI countries; 74 [31·4%] of 236 patients in middle-HDI countries; 72 [39·8%] of 181 patients in low-HDI countries). Following risk factor adjustment, patients in low-HDI countries were at greatest risk of SSI (adjusted odds ratio 1·60, 95% credible interval 1·05-2·37; p=0·030). 132 (21·6%) of 610 patients with an SSI and a microbiology culture result had an infection that was resistant to the prophylactic antibiotic used. Resistant infections were detected in 49 (16·6%) of 295 patients in high-HDI countries, in 37 (19·8%) of 187 patients in middle-HDI countries, and in 46 (35·9%) of 128 patients in low-HDI countries (p<0·001). Countries with a low HDI carry a disproportionately greater burden of SSI than countries with a middle or high HDI and might have higher rates of antibiotic resistance. In view of WHO recommendations on SSI prevention that highlight the absence of high-quality interventional research, urgent, pragmatic, randomised trials based in LMICs are needed to assess measures aiming to reduce this preventable complication. DFID-MRC-Wellcome Trust Joint Global Health Trial Development Grant, National Institute of Health Research Global Health Research Unit Grant.

Background The World Health Organization (WHO) Surgical Safety Checklist has fostered safe practice for 10 years, yet its place in emergency surgery has not been assessed on a global scale. The aim of this study was to evaluate reported checklist use in emergency settings and examine the relationship with perioperative mortality in patients who had emergency laparotomy. Methods In two multinational cohort studies, adults undergoing emergency laparotomy were compared with those having elective gastrointestinal surgery. Relationships between reported checklist use and mortality were determined using multivariable logistic regression and bootstrapped simulation. Results Of 12 296 patients included from 76 countries, 4843 underwent emergency laparotomy. After adjusting for patient and disease factors, checklist use before emergency laparotomy was more common in countries with a high Human Development Index (HDI) (2455 of 2741, 89·6 per cent) compared with that in countries with a middle (753 of 1242, 60·6 per cent; odds ratio (OR) 0·17, 95 per cent c.i. 0·14 to 0·21, P < 0·001) or low (363 of 860, 42·2 per cent; OR 0·08, 0·07 to 0·10, P < 0·001) HDI. Checklist use was less common in elective surgery than for emergency laparotomy in high‐HDI countries (risk difference −9·4 (95 per cent c.i. −11·9 to −6·9) per cent; P < 0·001), but the relationship was reversed in low‐HDI countries (+12·1 (+7·0 to +17·3) per cent; P < 0·001). In multivariable models, checklist use was associated with a lower 30‐day perioperative mortality (OR 0·60, 0·50 to 0·73; P < 0·001). The greatest absolute benefit was seen for emergency surgery in low‐ and middle‐HDI countries. Conclusion Checklist use in emergency laparotomy was associated with a significantly lower perioperative mortality rate. Checklist use in low‐HDI countries was half that in high‐HDI countries.

Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide. A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study—a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital. Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3·85 [95% CI 2·58–5·75]; p<0·0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63·0% vs 82·7%; OR 0·35 [0·23–0·53]; p<0·0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer. Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised. National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Objective: This study aimed to determine whether remote wound reviews using telemedicine can be safely upscaled, and if standardized assessment tools are needed. Background: Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common complication of surgery worldwide, and frequently occurs after hospital discharge. Evidence to support implementation of telemedicine during postoperative recovery will be an essential component of pandemic recovery. Methods: The primary outcome of this study was SSI reported up to 30 days after surgery (SSI), comparing rates reported using telemedicine (telephone and/or video assessment) to those with in-person review. The first part of this study analyzed primary data from an international cohort study of adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery who were discharged from hospital before 30 days after surgery. The second part combined this data with the results of a systematic review to perform a meta-analysis of all available data conducted in accordance with PRIMSA guidelines (PROSPERO:192596). Results: The cohort study included 15,358 patients from 66 countries (8069 high, 4448 middle, 1744 low income). Of these, 6907 (45.0%) were followed up using telemedicine. The SSI rate reported using telemedicine was slightly lower than with in-person follow-up (13.4% vs 11.1%, P<0.001), which persisted after risk adjustment in a mixed-effects model (adjusted odds ratio: 0.73, 95% confidence interval: 0.63–0.84, P<0.001). This association was consistent across sensitivity and subgroup analyses, including a propensity-score matched model. In 9 eligible nonrandomized studies identified, a pooled mean of 64% of patients underwent telemedicine follow-up. Upon meta-analysis, the SSI rate reported was lower with telemedicine (odds ratio: 0.67, 0.47–0.94) than in-person (reference) follow-up (I ²=0.45, P=0.12), although there a high risk of bias in included studies. Conclusions: Use of telemedicine to assess the surgical wound postdischarge is feasible, but risks underreporting of SSI. Standardized tools for remote assessment of SSI must be evaluated and adopted as telemedicine is upscaled globally.

Dementia is a neurological disorder that commonly affects the elderly. Cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) are small, tiny lesions of the cerebral blood vessels and have been suggested as a possible risk factor for dementia. However, data about the association between CMBs and dementia risk are inconsistent and inconclusive. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the association between CMBs and dementia and highlight the possible explanations. We followed the standard PRISMA statement and the Cochrane Handbook guidelines to conduct this study. First, we searched medical electronic databases for relevant articles. Then, we screened the retrieved articles for eligibility, extracted the relevant data, and appraised the methodological quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Finally, the extracted data were pooled as risk ratios (RR) and hazard ratios (HR) in the random-effects meta-analysis model using the Review Manager software. We included nine studies with 14,221 participants and follow-up periods > 18 months. Overall, CMBs significantly increased the risk of developing dementia (RR 1.84, 95% CI [1.27-2.65]). This association was significant in the subgroups of studies on high-risk populations (RR 2.00, 95% CI [1.41-2.83], n = 1657 participants) and those in the general population (RR 2.30, 95% CI [1.25-4.26], n = 12,087 participants) but not in the memory clinic patients. Further, CMBs increased the risk of progressing to incident dementia over time (HR 2, 95% CI [1.54-2.61]). Individuals with CMBs have twice the risk of developing dementia or progressing to MCI than those without CMBs. The detection of CMBs will help identify the population at higher risk of developing dementia. Physicians should educate individuals with CMBs and their families on the possibility of progressing to dementia or MCI. Regular cognitive assessments, cognitive training, lifestyle modifications, and controlling other dementia risk factors are recommended for individuals with CMBs to decrease the risk of cognitive decline and dementia development.