Prehospital care, though critical to injury survival, is largely unavailable in many low and middle-income countries, including Cameroon. Lay first responder (LFR) programmes train persons with high injury exposure in first-aid and emergency transport, but stakeholder buy-in from trainees and healthcare workers (HCWs) is essential. To design a context-appropriate prehospital care system, we evaluated barriers and facilitators of implementing a driver-based LFR programme in Cameroon.

In April 2023, we performed a mixed-methods evaluation targeting commercial mototaxi drivers and HCW in Limbe, Cameroon. Drivers were recruited for focus groups through union leaders. Trauma HCW at Limbe Regional Hospital completed Likert surveys and a subgroup completed semistructured interviews. Data collection focused on perceptions, barriers and facilitators of LFR programme implementation. Survey data were summarised using median and IQR. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, translated and analysed with open and axial coding using reflexive thematic analysis.

Overall, 92 mototaxi drivers and 34 HCWs participated in the LFR programme assessment. Among the HCW surveyed, 93% felt mototaxi drivers were capable of training as LFR but only 44% felt that drivers would be able to provide care safely. Interviews identified negative HCW perceptions of drivers, including drivers being uneducated and financially motivated, as key barriers, whereas driver exposure to injury was identified as a facilitator to LFR programme implementation. Driver groups demonstrated a positive perception of LFR training but identified unpaid time spent transporting injured persons as a significant barrier. Both groups described a need for hospital involvement in trainings and bidirectional standardised communication with HCW.

In Cameroon, driver-based LFR may facilitate increased prehospital care but further exploration of possible systems of collaboration that promote long-term success of the programme is required. Specifically, sustainable implementation will need to include clear bidirectional communication guidelines and provide driver incentive commensurate to effort.

To assess the feasibility of conducting a cluster randomised controlled trial comparing the effects of Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) and Primary Trauma Care (PTC) with standard care on patient outcomes.

This was a pilot pragmatic three-armed parallel, cluster randomised, controlled trial conducted between April 2022 and February 2023. Patients were followed up for 30 days.

Tertiary care hospitals across metropolitan areas in India.

Adult trauma patients and residents managing these patients were included.

ATLS or PTC training was provided for residents in the intervention arms.

The outcomes were the consent rate, loss to follow-up rate, missing data rates, differences in the distribution between observed data and data extracted from medical records, and the resident pass rate.

Two hospitals were randomised to the ATLS arm, two to the PTC arm and three to the standard care arm. We included 376 patients and 22 residents. The percentage of patients who consented to follow-up was 77% and the percentage of residents who consented to receive training was 100%. The loss to follow-up rate was 14%. The pass rate was 100%. Overall, the amount of missing data for key variables was low. The data collected through observations were similar to data extracted from medical records, but there were more missing values in the extracted data.

Conducting a full-scale cluster randomised controlled trial comparing the effects of ATLS, PTC and standard care on patient outcomes appears feasible, especially if such a trial would use data and outcomes available in medical records.

NCT05417243.