Clinical practice visits: a rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Practice visits are a peer review activity where one or more healthcare providers visit the practice of another in the same field. The purpose of this exercise is for visitors to observe and review a host's practice in a non-punitive manner and provide them with constructive feedback as required; ultimately to improve practice quality and patient care. METHODS: A rapid review of three biomedical databases was conducted to identify relevant literature published up until 9 April 2018. There were no limits placed on publication date or publication type. Two authors were responsible for study selection and data extraction using a priori inclusion criteria and extraction templates. Study details and key findings were reported narratively and in tables. RESULTS: A total of nine publications, reporting outcomes for eight study groups, were identified as eligible for inclusion in this rapid review. Of these eight, six were observational studies, one was a longitudinal study and one was a randomized controlled trial. Practice visits were considered useful in identifying areas of improvement in professional practice; however, the rate at which these improvements were elicited varied greatly between the included studies. Overall, both hosts and visitors gained insight from the practice visit process and in general their experiences were positive. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the evidence provided by the included studies, recommendations for an effective practice visit can be made. Importantly, the poor quality and age of the literature from which these recommendations are based should be considered.

Morbidity and mortality meetings: gold, silver or bronze?

BACKGROUND: Morbidity and mortality (M&M) meetings contribute to surgical education and improvements in patient care through the review of surgical outcomes; however, they often lack defined structure, objectives and resource support. The aim of this study was to investigate the factors that impact the effective conduct of M&M meetings. METHODS: We conducted a rapid systematic literature review. Three biomedical databases (PubMed, the Cochrane Library and the University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination), clinical practice guideline clearinghouses and grey literature sources were searched from May 2009 to September 2016. Studies that evaluated the function of a hospital-based M&M process were included. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection and data extraction. Study details and key findings were reported narratively. RESULTS: Nineteen studies identified enablers, and seven identified barriers, to the effective conduct of M&M meetings. Enabling factors for effective M&M meetings included a structured meeting format, a structured case identification and presentation, and a systems focus. Absence of key personnel from meetings, lack of education regarding the meeting process, poor perceptions of the process, logistical issues and heterogeneity in case evaluation were identified as barriers to effective M&M meetings. CONCLUSION: Taking steps to standardize and incorporate the enabling factors into M&M meetings will ensure that the valuable time spent reviewing M&M is used effectively to improve patient care.

Leaving surgical training: some of the reasons are in surgery.

In 2014, the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons identified, through internal analysis, a considerable attrition rate within its Surgical Education and Training programme. Within the attrition cohort, choosing to leave accounted for the majority. Women were significantly over-represented. It was considered important to study these 'leavers' if possible. An external group with medical education expertise were engaged to do this, a report that is now published and titled 'A study exploring the reasons for and experiences of leaving surgical training'. During this time, the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons came under serious external review, leading to the development of the Action Plan on Discrimination, Bullying and Sexual Harassment in the Practice of Surgery, known as the Building Respect, Improving Patient Safety (BRIPS) action plan. The 'Leaving Training Report', which involved nearly one-half of all voluntary 'leavers', identified three major themes that were pertinent to leaving surgical training. Of these, one was about surgery itself: the complexity, the technical, decision-making and lifestyle demands, the emotional aspects of dealing with seriously sick patients and the personal toll of all of this. This narrative literature review investigates these aspects of surgical education from the trainees' perspective.

Systematic review of computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Conventional total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and the more recently available computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty (CNTKA) use alternative methods to achieve correct limb alignment. This systematic review was undertaken to assess the safety and effectiveness of CNTKA compared with conventional TKA. METHODS: A systematic search of multiple databases identified relevant randomized controlled trials published to August 2012. Study inclusion was established through application of a predetermined protocol, with independent assessment by two reviewers. RESULTS: Thirty randomized controlled trials were included. The majority of adverse events associated with CNTKA were minor and comparable with those seen with conventional TKA. Conversion to conventional TKA was required in 1% of patients undergoing CNTKA. Thirteen trials reporting on satisfactory post-operative radiological alignment of the mechanical axis in the frontal plane were suitable for meta-analysis, which showed a significant total odds ratio (non-event) of 2.32 (95% confidence interval: 1.77-3.04) in favour of CNTKA (P < 0.00001). Clinical outcomes were comparable between the two techniques, with longer-term follow-up suggesting that CNTKA provided no benefit over conventional TKA in terms of sustained functional improvements. CONCLUSIONS: At present, it is unclear whether the significant improvements shown in radiological outcomes after CNTKA translate to measurable clinical benefits. Although an assumption could be made that an improvement in post-operative alignment should lead to an improvement in patient-related outcomes, the available literature did not clearly show this. Further, long-term trials are required to address this issue.