Is The Consent Process Appropriate - The Interns' Perspective?

Aims Consent is an integral component to any medical procedure involving a competent patient, a communicating doctor, and transfer of information about the procedure. The aim of this study was to assess interns' experience of the consent process. Methods An online questionnaire was distributed to interns in Ireland questioning their role in the consent process within six months of starting as an intern. Results One hundred and seventy-one interns (89.1%) had consented a patient for a procedure during their first intern rotation. One hundred and forty-three (83.6%) reported their supervisors did not explain the procedure to the intern prior to consent. One hundred and fifty-eight (92.4%) respondents consented for a procedure which they had not witnessed before. Sixty (35.1%) of interns reported that they have obtained signed consent without fully discussing the procedure and the associated risks. Conclusion The most junior members of a team are independently consenting patients on a regular basis without the appropriate level of knowledge.

Comparison of zones 1 to 4 flexor tendon repairs using absorbable and unabsorbable four-strand core sutures.

Absorbable sutures behave favourably in vitro and in an animal model. We report the outcome of flexor tendon injuries in a series of 272 consecutive patients treated over 45 months with a mean follow-up of 4 (range 3-12) months. Five hundred and seventy-six tendons were repaired in 416 digits. The patients were not randomised and all repairs were performed using a Strickland four-strand core technique. In 191 (73%) patients an absorbable core suture was used (Group 1) and in 81 (27%) a non-absorbable material was used (Group 2). There were six ruptures (2%) in Group 1 and two (2%) in Group 2. Using the original Strickland criteria, there were 72% excellent/good and 28% fair/poor results in the absorbable core suture group, and 73% and 27%, respectively, in the non-absorbable core suture group. This study suggests that appropriate absorbable core sutures can be used safely for flexor tendon repair.

The factors considered by editors of plastic surgery journals in evaluating submitted manuscripts.

The publication of clinical- or laboratory-based research in peer-reviewed journals is seen as the final end point rewarding many months of detailed work. For both trainees and established consultants alike, having a submitted manuscript rejected is both frustrating and disheartening. All journals publish details regarding manuscript structure and preparation. However these "in-house" guidelines tell little about what editors are looking for in their journals, and indeed what can be done to ensure acceptance of any work that researchers submit. The authors surveyed the editors of 40 peer-reviewed plastic surgery and related subspeciality journals regarding factors that influence their decision to accept or reject a manuscript. The aim was to establish factors that influence editors' decisions regarding submitted papers, which then would enable aspects to be highlighted that authors could address to expedite publication and produce relevant guidelines to facilitate this process. The results demonstrate that editors value an original, rigorously designed manuscript with valid methodology and appropriate conclusions. Adherence to the philosophy and aims of the journal and the journal's target audience will further improve the likelihood of successful publication for the submitting authors.