A prospective, randomised, single-blinded controlled trial comparing ultrasound versus nerve stimulator guidance for interscalene block for ambulatory upper limb surgeries.

Background: Interscalene block is usually performed using either ultrasound (US) or nerve stimulator (NS) guidance. This single-blinded, prospective, randomised study was performed to find out whether US was able to offer distinct advantages over conventional NS guidance. Methods: 100 patients in the American Society of Anaesthesiology (ASA) physical status I to III, aged 18-70 years were randomised into US guided or NS guided group for interscalene block with 15 ml 0.5% bupivacaine and 5 ml 2% lignocaine. Patients were premedicated with midazolam 0.03 mg/kg (maximum 2 mg) and fentanyl 2 mcg/kg (max 100 mcg) was used as rescue analgesia. Result: Mean time of onset of sensory block in the NS group was 6.2 min (3.1), the US group 4.7 min (1.1), p value (<0.001). Mean duration of post-operative analgesia in NS group 323.6 min (98.6), US group 558.6 min (144.3), (p < 0.001). Mean time for performance of block NS Group 7.3 min (2.0), and in the US group 4.9 min (1.3), (p < 0.001). Number of needle passes NS group 1.7(0.9), US group 1.3 (1.0), (p < 0.005). Total cost per surgery with NS was Rs 363.10 less than in the US-guided block. Incremental cost effectiveness ratio for ultrasound group for onset of block was Rs -242.07, Rs 92.0 for duration of block and Rs -151.29 for time for performance of block. No incident of post-operative neurological complications seen in either group. Conclusion: Ultrasound use offers faster onset, longer duration of block, reduces time for performance of blocks with comparable complication rates. For most of the measured parameters it was superior but more costly than nerve stimulator for directly measured costs.

Transference of skills in robotic vs. laparoscopic simulation: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Elucidating how robotic skills are best obtained will enable surgeons to best develop future robotic training programs. We perform a randomized controlled trial to assess the performance of robotic compared to laparoscopic surgery, transference of pre-existing skills between the two modalities, and to assess the learning curve between the two using novice medical students. METHODS: Forty students were randomized into either Group A or B. Students practiced and were tested on a peg transfer task in either a laparoscopic simulator (LS) and robotic simulator (RS) in a pre-defined order. Performance, transference of skills and learning curve were assessed for each modality. Additionally, a fatigue questionnaire was issued. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between overall laparoscopic scores (219 ± 19) and robotic scores (227 ± 23) (p = 0.065). Prior laparoscopic skills performed significantly better on robotic testing (236 ± 12) than without laparoscopic skills (216 ± 28) (p = 0.008). There was no significant difference in scores between students with prior robotic skills (223 ± 16) than without robotic skills (215 ± 22) (p = 0.162). Students reported no difference in fatigue between RS and LS. The learning curve plateaus at similar times between both modalities. CONCLUSION: Novice medical students with laparoscopic skills performed better on a RS test than students without laparoscopic training, suggesting a transference of skills from laparoscopic to robotic surgery. These results suggest laparoscopic training may be sufficient in general surgery residencies as the skills transfer to robotic if used post-residency.

Cardiothoracic surgery during COVID-19: Our experience with different strategies.

Background: An acute respiratory disease (COVID-19), caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2,), has been declared a pandemic by WHO. A surgery on COVID-19 patients not only involves a risk of spread of the disease but also there is a serious concern for the patient's surgical outcomes and resources requirement. Aim: The retrospective study is aimed to provide a protocol for pre-operative testing of SARS CoV-2 using RT-PCR in the patient undergoing cardio-thoracic surgeries. Material and Methods: To analyze the impact of pre-operative testing of SARS- CoV-2 using RT-PCR in the patient undergoing elective cardio-thoracic surgeries. The patient who underwent surgical interventions during the COVID-19 lockdown period was divided into two phases. Phase I (without COVID-19 RT-PCR testing) and Phase II (with pre-operative COVID-19 RT-PCR testing). The retrospective comparison between the two study groups was done using Student t-test, Mann-Whitney U, and Chi square (χ2) test depending upon the clinical variable to be analyzed. Results: During the early phase (phase I), 26 patients underwent cardio-thoracic surgery without COVID-19 RT-PCR test. Whereas, during phase II, all patients were tested for COVID-19 using RT-PCR, preoperatively and a total of 64 surgeries were performed during this phase. One patient planned for CABG was positive on RT-PCR for COVID-19 and was sent to the quarantine ward. The difference in the pre-operative hospital stay between two groups was found to be statistically significant and a significant decrease in the number of PPE kits used, during the phase I. Conclusion: All asymptomatic patients should be tested for COVID-19 using RT-PCR prior to cardio-thoracic surgeries not only to contain the disease but to avoid potential implications of COVID-19 on the perioperative course, without added financial implications.

A rational approach to manage surgical procedures in COVID Era - A perspective based on experience in a private referral hospital.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: COVID-19 disease has imposed challenges in caring for non-Covid elective surgical patients. As elective surgeries become essential, we propose to evaluate our approach and outcomes of surgical procedures performed during the initial period of COVID-19 pandemic so as to provide a road-map for safer approach. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated outcomes in patients who underwent essential elective and emergency surgeries during the 5-week period between April 18, 2020 and May 28, 2020. All patients were screened at the front desk on their arrival to identify possible exposure to SARS- CoV-2. Nasopharyngeal swab of patients requiring hospital admission was tested for COVID-19 by quantitative RT-PCR. Patients needing essential elective surgery were taken up for surgery if they tested negative for COVID-19. Emergency procedures were undertaken in a demarcated theatre for COVID after taking level-3 protection without delay. The clinical data was reviewed and analysed. RESULTS: A total of 764 surgical procedures were conducted, of which 70.7% were elective essential surgeries, with 95.4% of these patients being discharged in stable healthy condition. Approximately 23% of the elective and 26% of the emergency surgeries was categorised in the surgical difficulty category III and majority of these were performed under general anesthesia. Postoperative mortality was 1.04%, but the overall mortality rate was approximately 2.5%. Only two patients (0.3%) tested positive for COVID-19 in our series. CONCLUSION: A robust preoperative screening and testing can enable safe scheduling of essential elective surgeries.

Laparoscopic Simulation in Reverse and Side Alignment Impact on Forward Alignment Performance: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The influence of visual-spatial discordance during training on laparoscopic skills is poorly understood. It has been proposed that training in visual-spatial discordant situations can improve performance in the forward alignment, which was the basis of our hypothesis. Our study's aim was to conduct a randomized control trial to explore the impact of simulated training in visual-spatial discordant situations on forward alignment performance. METHODS: The participants were 80 medical students who were randomized into four groups. Group A served as the control and performed all peg transfers in the forward alignment. Groups B, C, and D experienced varied rounds of either increasing or decreasing sensorimotor discordance. The students were trained and tested using the peg transfer task used in the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery curriculum. Based on the group, each student performed 10 peg transfer practice rounds in their assigned alignment. After each practice session, each student was tested and scored in forward alignment performance. A baseline test, followed by three practice sessions, and three tests were done. RESULTS: Group A (control) demonstrated a statistically significant overall increase in scoring of 37.1% from baseline when compared to the final test. Groups B, C, and D showed improvements of 3.7%, 27.1%, and 19.3%, respectively, between baseline and the final test, yet none demonstrated consistent linear improvements. On multi-variate analysis, students who practiced in the side or reverse alignment positions scored 25 and 37 points lower, respectively, than students who practiced in the forward alignment. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that training in visual-spatial discordant conditions does not lead to the development of forward alignment laparoscopic skills. This could have important implications when developing future laparoscopic skills training curriculums. To our knowledge, this is the largest study to date assessing the impacts of training in visual-spatial discordance situations on performance in the forward alignment.

Perioperative self-reflection among surgical residents.

BACKGROUND: We studied prevalence and predictors of meaningful self-reflection among surgical residents and with prompting/structured interventions, sought to improve/sustain resident skills. METHODS: Residents from six programs recorded 1032 narrative self-reflective comments (120 residents), using a web-based platform. If residents identified something learned or to be improved, self-reflection was deemed meaningful. Independent variables PGY level, resident/surgeon gender, study site/Phase1: July2014-August2015 vs. Phase2: September2015-September2016) were analyzed. RESULTS: Meaningful self-reflection was documented in 40.6% (419/1032) of entries. PGY5's meaningfully self-reflected less than PGY1-4's, 26.1% vs. 49.6% (p = 0.002). In multivariate analysis, resident narratives during Phase 2 were 4.7 times more likely to engage in meaningful self-reflection compared to Phase1 entries (p < 0.001). Iterative changes during Phase2 showed a 236% increase in meaningful self-reflection, compared to Phase1. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical residents uncommonly practice meaningful self-reflection, even when prompted, and PGY5/chief residents reflect less than more junior residents. Substantial/sustained improvements in resident self-reflection can occur with both training and interventions.

Do female surgeons learn or teach differently?

BACKGROUND: Gender and/or gender-stereotypes might influence surgical education. We hypothesized that female surgeons might focus their learning and teaching differently from male surgeons. METHODS: Residents and surgeons (multi-institutional) individually recorded preoperatively discussed learning objectives (LO) for matching cases. Narratives were classified as knowledge-based, skill-based, or attitude-based. Multinomial logistic regression analyses, LO = dependent variable; independent variables = resident/surgeon gender, PGY level, timing of entry-to-procedure date, and quarters-of-year. RESULTS: 727 LOs from 125 residents (41% female) and 49 surgeons (20% female) were classified. Female residents were 1.4 times more likely to select knowledge over skill. With female surgeons, residents were 1.6 and 2.1 times more likely to select knowledge over skill and attitude over skill than if the surgeon was male. PGY 4/5 residents chose attitude-based LOs over junior residents. CONCLUSION: Resident, surgeon gender and year-of-training influence learning objectives. Whether this reflects gender stereotyping by residents or differences in attending teaching styles awaits further exploration.

A taxonomy of perioperative surgical learning: Trending resident skill acquisition.

BACKGROUND: Resident and curriculum evaluation require tracking surgical resident operative performance, yet what and when to measure remains unclear. METHODS: From a multi-institutional database, we reviewed 611 resident/surgeon-paired assessments of ACGME Milestones and modified OPRS ratings for different cases and postgraduate years. RESULTS: Faculty Milestone ratings increased with each PGY (p=<0.001) and correlated with resident self-ratings (ICC = 0.83). Mean OPRS scores increased in small increments with substantial intra-year variability. Progression among individual OPRS subcategories was not apparent from more global analyses. Interestingly, male faculty offered lower ratings than female faculty. CONCLUSIONS: Milestones and modified mean OPRS ratings suggest residents are learning, yet lack sufficient discrimination for promotion or curricular analysis. Differential progression through OPRS subcategories suggests a taxonomy of surgical learning that can be tailored to focus on different skills at each point in the training continuum. The effect of faculty gender on resident ratings awaits further study.

Impact of objectively assessing surgeons' teaching on effective perioperative instructional behaviors.

IMPORTANCE: Advancing surgical technology and decreasing resident learning hours have limited exposure to perioperative training, necessitating more effective and efficient perioperative teaching by faculty surgeons. Participation in collaborative efforts and process improvement can change behaviors and enhance teaching. OBJECTIVES: To promote deliberate teaching of residents, change resident perception of their teachers, and produce sustainable improvements by objectively measuring surgeons' perioperative teaching performance. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This 3-phase observational study of surgeons' perioperative teaching behaviors included university-based surgeons, general surgery residents, and preclinical student observers and involved elective cases at a 600+ bed tertiary hospital. Initially, we measured teaching behaviors by surgeons unaware of study objectives, provided aggregate and confidential individual feedback, and developed standardized preoperative briefings and postoperative debriefings. Phase 2 applied a deliberate teaching model and reinforced behaviors with continuous process improvement efforts (Plan, Do, Check, Act) and repeat observations. Phase 3 used resident prompts to enhance teaching behaviors and demonstrate sustainability. Resident surveys conducted 3 times assessed perceptions of deliberate guidance by faculty when compared with national benchmarks. INTERVENTIONS: Introduction of deliberate faculty preprocedural focusing and postprocedural reinforcement to facilitate resident learning. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: More frequent and complete perioperative teaching by faculty and the perception of enhanced teaching by residents. RESULTS: Faculty more commonly and more completely performed the 10-step preoperative briefings and postoperative debriefings (P < .001) during phase 2 (250% improvement over baseline). Intraoperative teaching styles significantly improved and residents' survey-reported assessments of faculty teaching improved over national data for describing procedural steps (P = .02) and requests for resident self-evaluation (P = .006). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Objective recording of teaching behavior frequency motivated adoption of deliberate guided teaching behaviors by surgeons, resulting in both subjective reports by residents of more frequent teaching and objective recording of parallel improvements. A deliberate focus on objectively assessing surgeon educators' periprocedural teaching may motivate improved teaching.