Trauma training in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review of ATLS alternatives

Heather A Brown; Caitlin Tidwell; Phillip Prest

doi:10.1016/j.afjem.2021.11.004

Trauma training in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review of ATLS alternatives

Afr J Emerg Med. 2022 Mar;12(1):53-60. doi: 10.1016/j.afjem.2021.11.004. Epub 2022 Jan 12.

Authors

Heather A Brown¹, Caitlin Tidwell¹, Phillip Prest²

Affiliations

¹ Prisma Health Midlands/University of South Carolina, Department of Emergency Medicine, Columbia, SC, USA.
² Prisma Health Midlands/University of South Carolina, Department of Surgery, Columbia, SC, USA.

Abstract

Introduction: Trauma training for front-line providers is a critical component of injury mitigation and trauma systems strengthening. Although the Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) course is standard in much of the world, cost and administrative barriers are prohibitive to deploying the course in many low and middle income countries (LMICs). The purpose of this study was to identify alternative trauma training courses used in LMICs by scoping review and compare their effectiveness.

Methods: Several peer-reviewed and grey literature databases were searched for relevant articles describing trauma training courses for front-line medical providers in LMICs. Studies were included if: performed in a LMIC; utilized a general trauma training course other than ATLS; trainees were hospital-based medical providers; study included some type of outcome measure.

Results: A total of 34 manuscripts met inclusion criteria. The majority of courses were novel, hospital-initiated courses and ranged in length from 1 day to 1 week. Physicians were the most common target audience, followed by medical students and nurses. Courses were taught in 24 different countries throughout the Middle East, Asia, Latin America and Africa. Comparison of pre- and post-test knowledge was the most common metric used and nearly all courses demonstrated a statistically significant knowledge gain. One study demonstrated a reduction in mortality for injured patients after course implementation. The majority of courses were a collaboration between universities in a high income country and local faculty/practitioners in the LMIC where the course was taught. Reported cost per participant ranged from $10 to $232 USD.

Conclusions: Several trauma courses are currently being utilized in LMICs effectively with increases in knowledge gained and at a lower reported cost than ATLS. More research is needed to link trauma training courses to patient outcomes.

Keywords: Emergency medicine; Injury; Low- and middle- income countries; Trauma care; Trauma training.

Publication types

Review