RESUMO
The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) Chief Registrar Programme (CRP) emerged from the RCP Future Hospital Commission Report (2013) and aimed to address development of clinical leadership and quality improvement to maintain high standards of patient safety and experience. The 2016 pilot created a new senior leadership role recruiting doctors in training committed to quality improvement and leadership development to champion delivering change in trusts, supported by a year-long bespoke development programme designed and delivered by the RCP. Following validation of the pilot's impact, the CRP has evolved to become a 'flagship' programme for the RCP with increasing penetrance across the UK to maximise impact for chief registrars to lead and deliver quality improvement in trusts. The longer-term goal is that enthusiastic early leaders will deliver sustainable and impactful change regionally and in the wider NHS. This article seeks to explore the CRP development themes and reflects on the learning from the programme and the experiences of chief registrars. The CRP has evolved during a time of significant healthcare challenge with the programme delivering a future generation of medical leaders to navigate these challenges, deliver improvement and innovation across the health sector. We show how chief registrars and alumni can continue to drive forward widespread impact on individuals, organisations and the wider NHS, providing a strategic solution to meet current and future challenges in the NHS.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: This study aims to explore characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) in the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support (EUROMACS). METHODS: This is a retrospective study of EUROMACS participants receiving MCS as bridge-to-transplant, possible bridge-to-transplant, or rescue therapy/bridge-to-recovery from 2011 to 2023 (n = 5340). Adult and paediatric cohorts were analysed separately. The primary outcome was mortality on MCS; secondary outcomes included recovery, transplant and complications including bleeding, cerebrovascular events, and sepsis. RESULTS: Among adult patients, mortality at 1-year was 33.3% among the CHD cohort vs 22.1% in the non-CHD cohort. Adult CHD patients had higher hazards of mortality within the first year after MCS implantation [hazard ratios 1.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.35-2.91, P < 0.001] and bleeding events (subdistribution hazard ratios 2.10, 95% CI 1.40-3.16, P < 0.001) compared with non-CHD patients. Both associations remained significant after accounting for multiple mediators. Among paediatric patients, mortality at 1 year was 22.1% in the CHD cohort vs 17.3% in the non-CHD cohort (hazard ratios 1.39, 95% CI 0.83-2.32, P = 0.213). CONCLUSIONS: Adult and paediatric patients with CHD on MCS have higher adverse event risk compared with non-CHD MCS patients, though children did not have greater risk of mortality. As the number of CHD patients requiring advanced heart failure management continues to grow, these findings can enhance informed decision-making. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Registry name: EUROMACS.