Does being in the hot seat matter? Effect of passive vs active learning in surgical simulation.

BACKGROUND: Participation in simulation can improve future performance, but it is unclear if observation of simulation scenarios can produce an equivalent benefit. METHODS: First-year surgical residents were exposed to various simulation scenarios in groups of 4 or 5, either through active participation or passive observation. Residents were individually assessed on 3 of the scenarios. Scores were categorized based on resident level of exposure to the scenario and analyzed using a multivariate analysis. RESULTS: 32 residents were enrolled and 28 underwent testing. Previous exposure to the scenario as a participant or observer led to improved performance on medical management and overall performance compared to those who had not been exposed (p < 0.02). However, active participation did not improve performance relative to passive observation (p > 0.1). Previous exposure did not improve communication aspects of the scenarios. CONCLUSION: Analyses confirmed the advantage of simulation-based training, but additionally suggest that the benefits for similar in both active participants and passive observers. This supports the idea of group based simulation training which can be more cost and time efficient.

Google Maps offers a new way to evaluate claudication.

BACKGROUND: Accurate determination of walking capacity is important for the clinical diagnosis and management plan for patients with peripheral arterial disease. The current "gold standard" of measurement is walking distance on a treadmill. However, treadmill testing is not always reflective of the patient's natural walking conditions, and it may not be fully accessible in every vascular clinic. The objective of this study was to determine whether Google Maps, the readily available GPS-based mapping tool, offers an accurate and accessible method of evaluating walking distances in vascular claudication patients. METHODS: Patients presenting to the outpatient vascular surgery clinic between November 2013 and April 2014 at the Ottawa Hospital with vasculogenic calf, buttock, and thigh claudication symptoms were identified and prospectively enrolled in our study. Onset of claudication symptoms and maximal walking distance (MWD) were evaluated using four tools: history; Walking Impairment Questionnaire (WIQ), a validated claudication survey; Google Maps distance calculator (patients were asked to report their daily walking routes on the Google Maps-based tool runningmap.com, and walking distances were calculated accordingly); and treadmill testing for onset of symptoms and MWD, recorded in a double-blinded fashion. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were recruited for the study. Determination of walking distances using Google Maps proved to be more accurate than by both clinical history and WIQ, correlating highly with the gold standard of treadmill testing for both claudication onset (r = .805; P < .001) and MWD (r = .928; P < .0001). In addition, distances were generally under-reported on history and WIQ. The Google Maps tool was also efficient, with reporting times averaging below 4 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: For vascular claudicants with no other walking limitations, Google Maps is a promising new tool that combines the objective strengths of the treadmill test and incorporates real-world walking environments. It offers an accurate, efficient, inexpensive, and readily accessible way to assess walking distances in patients with peripheral vascular disease.

Efficacy of targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma in the elderly patient population.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: Targeted therapy has become the mainstay of treatment for mRCC. The efficacy of this therapy in the older population is poorly understood. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from patients with mRCC treated with first-line anti-VEGF therapy were collected through the International mRCC Database Consortium from 12 centers. Patient characteristics, data on second-line therapy, and outcomes including treatment duration and overall survival, were evaluated using summary statistics and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: All patients (n = 1381) were treated with front-line targeted therapy; 144 (10%) were 75 years old or older. Six patients (4%) were favorable risk, 99 patients (69%) intermediate risk, and 39 patients (27%) poor risk according to Heng Journal of Clinical Oncology 2009 prognostic factors. The initial treatment for those ≥ 75 years of age was sunitinib (n = 98), sorafenib (n = 35), bevacizumab (n = 7), and AZD217 (n = 4). Twenty-three percent of older patients and 39% of the younger patients went on to receive second-line therapy (P < .0001). The overall response rate, median treatment duration, and overall survival for the older versus younger group were 18% versus 25% (P = .0975), 5.5 months versus 7.5 months (P = .1388), and 16.8 months versus 19.7 months (P = .3321), respectively. When adjusted for poor prognostic factors, age 75 years and older was not found to be associated with poorer overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.002; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.781-1.285) or shorter treatment duration (HR, 1.018; 95% CI, 0.827-1.252). The retrospective study design was the primary limitation. CONCLUSION: The use of advanced age as a selection criterion for targeted therapy requires further study, with data suggesting no clinically meaningful differences in overall response rate, treatment duration, and overall survival between older and younger age groups.