Prof. Abebe Bekele

Since the first African country attained independence from colonial rule, surgical training on the continent has evolved along 3 principal models. The first is a colonial, local master-apprentice model, the second is a purely local training model, and the third is a collegiate intercountry model. The 3 models exist currently and there are varied perceptions of their relative merits in training competent neurosurgeons. We reviewed the historical development of training and in an accompanying study, seek to describe the complex array of surgical training pathways and explore the neocolonial underpinnings of how these various models of training impact today the development of surgical capacity in Africa. In addition, we sought to better understand how some training systems may contribute to the widely recognized “brain drain” of surgeons from the African continent to high income countries in Europe and North America. To date, there are no published studies evaluating the impact of surgical training systems on skilled workforce emigration out of Africa. This review aims to discover potentially addressable sources of improving healthcare and training equity in this region.

Background As a result of gradual independence from colonial rule over the course of the past century, Africa has developed and evolved 3 primary surgical training structures: an extracontinental colonial model, an intracontinental college-based model, and several smaller national or local models. There is consistent evidence of international brain drain of surgical trainees and an unequal continental distribution of surgeons; however there has not, to date, been an evaluation of the impact colonialism on the evolution of surgical training on the continent. This study aims to identify the etiologies and consequences of this segmentation of surgical training in Africa. Methods This is a cross-sectional survey of the experience and perspectives of surgical training by current African trainees and graduates. Results A surgeon's region of residence was found to have a statistically significant positive association with that of a surgeon's training structure (P <0.001). A surgeon's professional college or structure of residency has a significantly positive association with desire to complete subspecialty training (P = 0.008). College and structure of residency also are statistically significantly associated with successful completion of subspecialty training (P < 0.001). Conclusions These findings provide evidence to support the concept that the segmentation of surgical training structures in Africa, which is the direct result of prior colonization, has affected the distribution of trainees and specialists across the continent and the globe. This maldistribution of African surgical trainees directly impacts patient care, as the surgeon–patient ratios in many African countries are insufficient. These inequities should be acknowledged addressed and rectified to ensure that patients in Africa receive timely and appropriate surgical care.

The term “global health equity” has become more visible in recent years, yet we were unable to find a formal definition of the term. Our Viewpoint addresses this gap by offering a discussion of this need and proposing a definition. We define global health equity as mutually beneficial and power-balanced partnerships and processes leading to equitable human and environmental health outcomes (which we refer to as “products”) on a global scale. Equitable partnerships actively work against racism and supremacy. Such partnerships foster processes with these same dynamics; for example, sharing lead authorship responsibilities with meaningful roles for host country researchers to frame relevant questions and to provide context and interpretation for the research findings. Equitable products, such as access to technology and tailored delivery of interventions effective in the specific context, are the fruits of these partnerships and processes.