Abstract
Background
With the primary objective of addressing the disparity in global surgical care access, the College of Surgeons of East, Central, and Southern Africa (COSECSA) trains surgeons. While sufficient operative experience is crucial for surgical training, the extent of utilization of minimally invasive techniques during COSECSA training remains understudied.
Methods
We conducted an extensive review of COSECSA general surgery trainees' operative case logs from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020, focusing on the utilization of minimally invasive surgical procedures. Our primary objective was to determine the prevalence of laparoscopic procedures and compare this to open procedures. We analyzed the distribution of laparoscopic cases across common indications such as cholecystectomy, appendicitis, and hernia operations. Additionally, we examined the impact of trainee autonomy, country development index, and hospital type on laparoscopy utilization.
Results
Among 68,659 total cases, only 616 (0.9%) were laparoscopic procedures. Notably, 34 cases were conducted during trainee external rotations in countries like the United Kingdom, Germany, and India. Gallbladder and appendix pathologies were most frequent among the 582 recorded laparoscopic cases performed in Africa. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy accounted for 29% (276 of 975 cases), laparoscopic appendectomy for 3% (76 of 2548 cases), and laparoscopic hernia repairs for 0.5% (26 of 5620 cases). Trainees self-reported lower autonomy for laparoscopic (22.5%) than open cases (61.5%). Laparoscopy usage was more prevalent in upper-middle-income (2.7%) and lower-middle-income countries (0.8%) compared with lower-income countries (0.5%) (p < 0.001). Private (1.6%) and faith-based hospitals (1.5%) showed greater laparoscopy utilization than public hospitals (0.5%) (p < 0.001).
Conclusions
The study highlights the relatively low utilization of minimally invasive techniques in surgical training within the ECSA region. Laparoscopic cases remain a minority, with variations observed based on specific diagnoses. The findings suggest a need to enhance exposure to minimally invasive procedures to ensure well-rounded training and proficiency in these techniques.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
The global disparity in surgical access has been a pressing concern [1], with a pronounced gap evident in East, Central, and Southern Africa. To address this issue, the College of Surgeons of East, Central, and Southern Africa (COSECSA) was established to facilitate surgical training within the region [2]. While operative case experience is crucial for surgical training and has been shown to improve technical skills and work-based assessments [3, 4], the focus has predominantly been on open procedures.
Since its advancement in the 1980s, minimally invasive surgery has played an important role in general surgery. It offers benefits over open surgery with reduced hospital stays and decreased surgical site infections. Surgical training programs have been changing regarding required laparoscopic skills for trainees. For example, in the United States, the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) certification examination is a requirement for taking the American Board of Surgery (ABS) qualifying examination [5]. The current state of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and laparoscopy in sub-Saharan Africa is a subject of increasing importance, especially given its potential benefits and the growing interest among surgeons in the region to overcome the existing barriers to its widespread implementation. In a survey of surgeons in East, Central, and Southern Africa, 93% of respondents expressed a desire to increase their laparoscopy utilization [6]. Studies in the region have demonstrated the feasibility and utility of laparoscopy in treating pathologies [7,8,9,10,11]. Audits at institutions in Nigeria and Senegal highlight the advantages of laparoscopic surgery, demonstrating shorter hospital stays and equivalent wound complication rates compared with open procedures [12, 13]. Despite the evident potential, sub-Saharan Africa faces significant obstacles in incorporating laparoscopy into surgical practice, including limited access to training resources, mentors, equipment, and industry presence, and consumable supplies, as well as high costs [6, 14, 15].
Recent investigations have examined various training programs in African countries, shedding light on the diverse case volumes trainees encounter [16, 17]. There have been suggested guideline minimums for surgical procedures assigned to each trainee in the region; however, accreditation criteria currently do not account for MIS training [17, 18]. Not only is there no recommended minimum number assigned to minimally invasive surgical procedures, but also there is a limited understanding of the application of these techniques in this setup. This void in research represents an unexplored area that warrants further investigation, as a detailed understanding could offer insights into the quality of surgical training and potential avenues for improvement.
The study aims to investigate laparoscopic procedures performed by COSECSA trainees, quantifying and categorizing the types of procedures while comparing them to open techniques. This research seeks to fill the identified knowledge gap, offering a benchmark for surgical training in East, Central, and Southern Africa.
Materials and methods
Study design and data source
This study is an in-depth sub-analysis of operative case logs maintained by general surgery trainees under the College of Surgeons of East, Central, and Southern Africa (COSECSA) between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020. A previous study investigated overall operative case volumes for COSECSA trainees [17]. For the current analysis, we specifically concentrated on laparoscopic procedures performed during the training period. The COSECSA eLogbook, initiated in 2015, served as our primary data repository [19]. These studies received ethical approval from COSECSA.
Study population
Trainees enrolled in either the FCS (Fellows of COSECSA) General Surgery program or the MCS (Members of COSECSA) program were included [20]. Our analysis excluded those who had not completed the requisite training years—two for MCS and three for FCS. Operations carried out while trainees were unenrolled were not considered. However, procedures undertaken in COSECSA unaccredited hospitals were retained to reflect the breadth of trainee experience. Cases were included regardless of geography to understand the trainee experience. However, to understand the utilization of laparoscopy within Africa, cases were excluded when not performed on the continent.
Data collection and categorization
Laparoscopic procedures were identified and categorized according to predetermined categories set forth by COSECSA and subsequently validated. These procedures were further divided based on common indications such as cholecystectomy, appendicitis, and hernia repairs. We also integrated variables such as the level of trainee autonomy, the development index of the country where the operation was performed (as defined by the World Bank [21]), and the type of hospital facility (self-defined as public, private, or faith-based). To better understand the differences from geography and development indices, we examined case logs from each country and compared the case volumes in laparoscopy. For simplicity, the presence of autonomy was defined as a dichotomous variable with the resident’s self-reporting involvement of assisting and performing with the trainer scrubbed as no autonomy and performing the operation with the trainer unscrubbed or not present as with autonomy.
To ensure the validity of our data, multiple surgeons reviewed a random sample of procedures for categorization consistency, and agreement was assessed using Cohen's kappa statistic [17].
Outcome measures
Our primary outcomes were the prevalence of laparoscopic procedures relative to open surgeries and the percentage of cases involving laparoscopy for trainees’ experience. Secondary outcomes included the distribution of laparoscopic procedures over time and across varying indications, as well as the influence of external variables like country development index and hospital type on case utilization. An evaluation of the trainees’ self-reported autonomy was performed, and a comparison between laparoscopic and open cases was conducted.
Statistical analysis
Data were assembled in Microsoft Excel and analyzed with Stata version 16.0. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Nonparametric tests were employed to compare the volume of laparoscopic to open procedures and to examine variations across geographical and socio-economic settings. A p-value threshold of 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.
Results
Among 68,659 total cases, only 616 (0.9%) were laparoscopic procedures. Trainees had limited exposure with a median of 10 (IQR 6–17) laparoscopic cases for those with a complete five-year experience. Trainee experience with laparoscopy is detailed in Table 1. Ninety-five trainees (49.0%) reported no experience with an operation involving laparoscopy. Trainees reported lower autonomy for laparoscopic (22.5%) than open cases (61.5%) (p < 0.001).
Notably, 34 cases were conducted during trainee external rotations in countries like the United Kingdom, Germany, and India. The uptake of laparoscopy varies by country (Fig. 1) with specific numbers detailed in Table 2. Among the 582 laparoscopic cases performed in Africa, gallbladder (47%) and appendix (12%) pathologies were the most frequent. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy accounted for 29% (276 of 975 cholecystectomies), laparoscopic appendectomy for 3% (76 of 2548 appendectomies), and laparoscopic hernia repairs for 0.5% (26 of 5620 hernia repairs).
There were no apparent trends over time with the usage of laparoscopy. Laparoscopy usage was more prevalent in upper-middle-income (2.7%) and lower-middle-income countries (0.8%) compared with lower-income countries (0.5%) (p < 0.001). Private (1.6%) and faith-based hospitals (1.5%) showed greater laparoscopy utilization than public hospitals (0.5%) (p < 0.001) (Table 3).
Discussion
Our study highlights the limited exposure to MIS during COSECSA training, with only 0.9% of total cases being laparoscopic. This rate of uptake among trainees reflects the broader challenge of low utilization of laparoscopic surgery in LMICs, particularly in East, Central, and Southern Africa. Our findings provide the baseline experience with MIS and underscore the need for curriculum enhancements to better prepare surgeons for the evolving landscape of surgical techniques.
Based on the data, the achievement of suggested operative minimums in the region appears challenging [18]. Rather than focusing solely on achieving numerical targets, alternative educational objectives, such as simulation-based training, should be considered, and are being incorporated into the curriculum [22]. While a positive correlation exists between higher case volumes and favorable patient outcomes [23,24,25,26], the surgical learning curve for a particular procedure requires a wide range from 25 to 750 operations [26]. Developing surgical autonomy is paramount for fostering competent and independent surgeons without compromising patient safety [27, 28]. While patient safety can be achieved with appropriate supervision and resident autonomy [27], the limited number of laparoscopic cases that trainees are exposed to during training suggests the need for faculty presence and oversight for laparoscopy. With limited MIS encounters during training, attention should be given to the accreditation and oversight of surgeons performing minimally invasive surgery in the region.
Several barriers to the adoption of laparoscopy have been previously identified, including financial constraints for procuring and maintaining equipment, as well as the scarcity of experienced trainers and structured training programs with validated curricula [14, 15, 29, 30]. To overcome the obstacles, various solutions have been proposed, including adapting technology to suit the context of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), reducing the costs associated with laparoscopic equipment and maintenance, telementoring, and providing sustained training for surgeons and operating room personnel [6, 31,32,33,34]. Addressing these barriers is crucial for improving access to laparoscopic surgery and enhancing the quality of surgical training in the region. In other settings, adoption of laparoscopy has been driven by surgeons [35], training initiatives [31,32,33], and government policies [36]. Further exploration of the impact of patient attitudes [37], hospital and training initiatives, and government priorities could help to understand their role in the uptake of laparoscopy in the region.
Creative solutions have emerged to address the laparoscopic simulation challenge using low-cost yet effective training tools, such as inexpensive box trainers and techniques like cutting and peeling a tangerine for practicing dissection and creating haptic feedback [38,39,40]. Tele-proctoring, artificial intelligence to gauge competency, and free online resources offer sustainable solutions for regions with limited access to trainers [41,42,43]. These innovative approaches can significantly enhance the accessibility and affordability of laparoscopic training, thereby increasing the adoption of MIS in LMICs. Embracing simulation into the curriculum could offset the lack of real-world experience identified in this review. With such limited case volume experience, COSECSA could consider requiring more simulation encounters before accreditation for fellowship.
Our findings indicate that laparoscopic surgery is more common in private and faith-based hospitals. This could be due to dedicated funding and institutional support for equipment and maintenance to facilitate the appropriate infrastructure. Faith-based hospitals in Africa are pivotal in providing essential and subspecialty surgical services and often collaborate with academic institutions to address the shortage of surgical education and training in LMICs [16, 44,45,46]. Faith-based hospitals have increased efficiency and patient satisfaction rates, which may lead to the implementation of cost-effective strategies that improve patient-centered outcomes like laparoscopy [44, 46]. Additionally, long-term faculty trained in other settings with high rates of laparoscopy or short-term visitors who support clinical care could help to advance laparoscopy by providing the requisite expertise [47]. Strengthening partnerships between these hospitals and training programs could further facilitate the integration of laparoscopic techniques into surgical practice.
Geographic variations in laparoscopic training are evident, paralleling trends observed in endoscopic training [48]. A substantial number of trainees did not gain any laparoscopic experience, especially in Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mozambique, and Somalia. Curriculum amendments could incorporate more comprehensive laparoscopic training to address these gaps. One strategy entails external rotations at centers specialized in laparoscopic procedures, which would augment technical skills and enrich the educational experience without jeopardizing patient safety.
Our study has limitations, including the absence of case log data from Pan-African Academy of Christian Surgeons (PAACS) trainees and the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on case volumes [49]. The exclusion of PAACS trainees, who are trained in faith-based hospitals and have an independent case log system, may have led to an underestimation of laparoscopic case exposure as previous reports indicate laparoscopic cases were twice the number found in this study with about two percent of total cases [16]. The global COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted surgical training and practice worldwide [49], which may have further influenced the availability and utilization of laparoscopic procedures during the study period. These limitations highlight the need for further research to assess their effects on surgical training and to explore strategies for overcoming these challenges. Additionally, our data depend solely on the case logs entered by trainees, which may not be exhaustive or entirely accurate. While the lack of external validation is a limitation, the requisite review of case logs by program directors does introduce some level of accountability. This constraint can affect the generalizability of our findings but does not detract from the insights our study provides. Future investigations should focus on evaluating various aspects of surgical training, including but not limited to the quality of laparoscopic equipment, faculty expertise, and institutional barriers. Such inquiry could inform curriculum development aimed at integrating minimally invasive procedures more effectively into general surgical training.
The limited exposure to MIS for COSECSA trainees underscores the need for enhanced understanding and collaboration among residents, surgeons, policymakers, and stakeholders. Addressing the barriers to laparoscopic training and implementing effective training programs are essential for improving surgical care in the East, Central, and Southern Africa region. By embracing innovative training methods and fostering partnerships, the surgical community can advance the adoption of minimally invasive techniques and ultimately enhance patient outcomes.
References
Alkire BC, Raykar NP, Shrime MG, Weiser TG, Bickler SW, Rose JA, Nutt CT, Greenberg SL, Kotagal M, Riesel JN (2015) Global access to surgical care: a modelling study. Lancet Glob Health 3:e316–e323
COSECSA (2021) College of Surgeons of East, Central, and Southern Africa
Harrington CM, Kavanagh DO, Ryan D, Dicker P, Lonergan PE, Traynor O, Tierney S (2017) Objective scoring of an electronic surgical logbook: Analysis of impact and observations within a surgical training body. Am J Surg 214:962–968
Abdelsattar JM, AlJamal YN, Ruparel RK, Rowse PG, Heller SF, Farley DR (2018) Correlation of objective assessment data with general surgery resident in-training evaluation reports and operative volumes. J Surg Educ 75:1430–1436
Brown NM, Helmer SD, Yates CL, Osland JS (2012) The revised ACGME laparoscopic operative requirements: How have they impacted resident education? Surg Endosc 26:1737–1743
Farrow NE, Commander SJ, Reed CR, Mueller JL, Gupta A, Loh AH, Sekabira J, Fitzgerald TN (2021) Laparoscopic experience and attitudes toward a low-cost laparoscopic system among surgeons in East, Central, and Southern Africa: a survey study. Surg Endosc 35:6539–6548
Ndegwa W, Katherine H, Parker R, White R, Heath M (2020) Laparoscopic Heller esophagomyotomy is safe and effective in Rural East Africa. Annals of African Surgery 17:1
Makhadi S, Lubout M, Moeng MS (2023) Introduction of laparoscopy in an Urban High-Volume Sub-Saharan Trauma Centre. World J Surg 47:1657–1661
Afuwape O, Ayandipo O, Abdurrrazzaaq A (2014) Laparoscopic appendectomy in a developing African country. East Central African J Surg 19:35–40
Galukande M, Jombwe J (2011) Feasibility of Laparoscopic surgery in a resource limited setting: cost containment, skills transfer and outcomes. East Central African J Surg 16:112–117
Esayas R, Shumey A, Selassie K (2015) Laproscopic surgery in a governmental teaching hospital: an initial experiance from Ayder referral hospital in Northern Ethiopia. East Central African J Surg 20:49–54
Smiley KE, Wuraola F, Mojibola BO, Aderounmu A, Price RR, Adisa AO (2023) An outcomes-focused analysis of laparoscopic and open surgery in a Nigerian hospital. JSLS 27(1)
Ndong A, Diallo AC, Rouhi AD, Diao ML, Yi W, Tendeng JN, Williams NN, Cissé M, Dumon KR, Konaté I (2023) Evolution of laparoscopic surgery in a sub-Saharan African country: a 30-year literature review in Senegal. Surg Endosc 37:6548–6557
Nyundo M, Umugwaneza N, Bekele A, Chikoya L, Gashegu J, Detry O (2023) Assessment of resource capacity and barriers to effective practice of laparoscopic surgery in training hospitals affiliated with the College of Surgeons of East, Central and Southern Africa (COSECSA). Surg Endosc 37:5121–5128
Nyundo M, Umugwaneza N, Bekele A, Chikoya L, Detry O, Gashegu J (2023) Exploring laparoscopic surgery training opportunities in the college of surgeons of East, Central, and Southern Africa region. J Surg Educ 10:1454–1461
Parker RK, Topazian HM, Ndegwa W, Chesang P, Strain S, Thelander K, Parker AS, Riviello R (2020) Surgical training throughout Africa: a review of operative case volumes at multiple training centers. World J Surg 44:2100–2107
Mwachiro MM, Yankunze Y, Bachheta N, Scroope E, Mangaoang D, Bekele A, White RE, Parker RK (2023) Operative case volumes and variation for general surgery training in East, Central, and Southern Africa. World J Surg 47:3032–3039
Parker RK, Topazian HM, Parker AS, Mwachiro MM, Strain S, White RE, Thelander K, Riviello R (2020) Operative case volume minimums necessary for surgical training throughout rural Africa. World J Surg 44:3245–3258
Harrington CM, Jang SS, Mangaoang D, O’Flynn E, Minja C, Chikoya L, Bekele A, Borgstein E (2020) Integration and sustainability of electronic surgical logbooks in sub-Saharan Africa. World J Surg 44:3259–3267
Parker AS, Hill KA, Steffes BC, Mangaoang D, O’Flynn E, Bachheta N, Bates MF, Bitta C, Carter NH, Davis RE (2022) Design of a novel online, modular, flipped-classroom surgical curriculum for East, Central, and Southern Africa. Ann Surg Open 3:e141
World Bank (2022) World Bank country and lending groups
Traynor MD Jr, Owino J, Rivera M, Parker RK, White RE, Steffes BC, Chikoya L, Matsumoto JM, Moir CR (2021) Surgical simulation in East, Central, and Southern Africa: a multinational survey. J Surg Educ 78:1644–1654
Dimick JB, Pronovost PJ, Cowan JA, Ailawadi G, Upchurch GR (2002) The volume-outcome effect for abdominal aortic surgery: Differences in case-mix or complications? Arch Surg 137:828–832
Schrag D, Panageas KS, Riedel E, Cramer LD, Guillem JG, Bach PB, Begg CB (2002) Hospital and surgeon procedure volume as predictors of outcome following rectal cancer resection. Ann Surg 236:583
Moore MJ, Bennett CL (1995) The learning curve for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The American journal of surgery 170:55–59
Maruthappu M, Gilbert BJ, El-Harasis MA, Nagendran M, McCulloch P, Duclos A, Carty MJ (2015) The influence of volume and experience on individual surgical performance: a systematic review. Ann Surg 261:642–647
Parker RK, Otoki K, Sylvester K, Roberts L, Many HR, Kim GJ, Mwachiro MM, Parker AS (2023) Trainee autonomy and surgical outcomes after emergency gastrointestinal surgery. Surgery 174:324–329
Parker RK, Mwachiro M, Sylvester K, Mwachiro E, Parker AS, Bidwell SS, Chen X, George BC, Kim GJ (2023) Achieving progressive operative autonomy at a teaching hospital in Kenya. Global Surg Educ-J Assoc Surg Educ 2:19
Choy I, Kitto S, Adu-Aryee N, Okrainec A (2013) Barriers to the uptake of laparoscopic surgery in a lower-middle-income country. Surg Endosc 27:4009–4015
Wilkinson E, Aruparayil N, Gnanaraj J, Brown J, Jayne D (2021) Barriers to training in laparoscopic surgery in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review. Trop Doct 51:408–414
Wells KM, Lee Y-J, Erdene S, Erdene S, Sanchin U, Sergelen O, Presson A, Zhang C, Rodriguez B, deVries C (2015) Expansion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a resource limited setting, Mongolia: a 9-year cross-sectional retrospective review. The Lancet 385:S38
Kang MJ, Apea-Kubi KB, Apea-Kubi KAK, Adoula N-G, Odonkor JNN, Ogoe AK (2020) Establishing a sustainable training program for laparoscopy in resource-limited settings: experience in Ghana. Ann Global Health 86
Parker M, Ramdass MJ, Cawich S, Oen PFS, Rosin D (2019) A historical perspective on the introduction of laparoscopic basic surgical training in the Caribbean and factors that contribute to sustainability of such training. Int J Surg 72:6–12
Del Fernandes R, Ghasroddashti A, Sorefan-Mangou F, Williams E, Choi K, Fasola L, Szasz P, Zevin B (2023) Educational effectiveness of telementoring as a continuing professional development intervention for surgeons in practice: a systematic review. Ann Surg Open 4:e341
Barrenho E, Miraldo M, Propper C, Walsh B (2021) The importance of surgeons and their peers in adoption and diffusion of innovation: an observational study of laparoscopic colectomy adoption and diffusion in England. Soc Sci Med 272:113715
Agresta F, Campanile FC, Podda M, Cillara N, Pernazza G, Giaccaglia V, Ciccoritti L, Ioia G, Mandalà S, La Barbera C (2017) Current status of laparoscopy for acute abdomen in Italy: a critical appraisal of 2012 clinical guidelines from two consecutive nationwide surveys with analysis of 271,323 cases over 5 years. Surg Endosc 31:1785–1795
Muaddi H, Zhao X, Leonardelli GJ, de Mestral C, Nathens A, Stukel TA, Guttman MP, Karanicolas PJ (2022) Fear of innovation: public’s perception of robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 36:6076–6083
Beard JH, Akoko L, Mwanga A, Mkony C, O’Sullivan P (2014) Manual laparoscopic skills development using a low-cost trainer box in Tanzania. J Surg Educ 71:85–90
Long KL, Spears C, Kenady DE, Roth JS (2014) Implementation of a low-cost laparoscopic skills curriculum in a third-world setting. J Surg Educ 71:860–864
Andreatta P, Perosky J, Klotz J, Gamble C, Ankobea F, Danso K, Dalton V (2014) Pilot study outcomes from a resource-limited setting for a low-cost training program for laparoscopic surgical skills. Int J Gynecol Obstet 125:186–188
Loveland J, Numanoglu A, Hay SA (2012) Pediatric minimally invasive surgery in Africa: limitations and current situation. Semin Pediatr Surg 21(2):160–163
Ryder CY, Mott NM, Gross CL, Anidi C, Shigut L, Bidwell SS, Kim E, Zhao Y, Ngam BN, Snell MJ (2024) Using artificial intelligence to gauge competency on a novel laparoscopic training system. J Surg Educ 81:267–274
Reynolds CW, Rooney DM, Jeffcoach DR, Barnard M, Snell MJ, El-Hayek K, Ngam BN, Bidwell SS, Anidi C, Tanyi J (2023) Evidence supporting performance measures of laparoscopic appendectomy through a novel surgical proficiency assessment tool and low-cost laparoscopic training system. Surg Endosc 37:7170–7177
Olivier J, Tsimpo C, Gemignani R, Shojo M, Coulombe H, Dimmock F, Nguyen MC, Hines H, Mills EJ, Dieleman JL (2015) Understanding the roles of faith-based health-care providers in Africa: review of the evidence with a focus on magnitude, reach, cost, and satisfaction. The Lancet 386:1765–1775
Van Essen C, Steffes BC, Thelander K, Akinyi B, Li H-F, Tarpley MJ (2019) Increasing and retaining African surgeons working in rural hospitals: an analysis of PAACS surgeons with twenty-year program follow-up. World J Surg 43:75–86
White RE, Parker RK (2017) Delivery of subspecialty surgical care in low-resource settings. In: Park A, Price R (eds) Global surgery: the essentials. Springer, Cham, pp. 69–107
Davis RE, Hansen EN, Newton MW (2016) Faith-based organizations and academic global surgery’s moral imperative. JAMA Surg 151:296–296
Parker RK, Mwachiro MM, Topazian HM, Davis R, Nyanga AF, O’Connor Z, Burgert SL, Topazian MD (2021) Gastrointestinal endoscopy experience of surgical trainees throughout rural Africa. Surg Endosc 35:6708–6716
COVIDSurg Collaborative (2020) Elective surgery cancellations due to the COVID-19 pandemic: global predictive modelling to inform surgical recovery plans. J Br Surg 107:1440–1449
Funding
Open Access funding provided by the IReL Consortium. There is no funding source to acknowledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to meeting all four of the requirements of ICJME recommendations. YY, MM, JL, and RP contributed to the concept and design of the project. NB enabled data collection at the direction of and with oversight from MM and AB. Data were then extracted and managed by DM. Data were categorized by RP and YY and validated by MM. Data were analyzed and interpreted by RP, YY, JL, and MM. YY and RP drafted the initial manuscript. All authors offered critical revisions and approved the final manuscript. The corresponding author, RP, confirms the final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Disclosures
Yves Yankunze, Michael M Mwachiro, June Owino Lando, Niraj Bachheta, Deirdre Mangaoang, Abebe Bekele and Robert K Parker have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
Ethical approval
The study received IRB approval from the College of Surgeons of East, Central, and Southern Africa.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This 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/.
About this article
Cite this article
Yankunze, Y., Mwachiro, M.M., Lando, J.O. et al. Laparoscopy experience in East, Central, and Southern Africa: insights from operative case volume analysis. Surg Endosc 38, 4415–4421 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-10960-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-10960-2