The acute management of ankle fractures (Augment) study: A prospective trainee led national collaborative audit of the Boast 12 guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Ankle fractures are one of the most common fractures in adults aged 20-65 years. The British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) and British Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (BOFAS) jointly produced Standards for Trauma (BOAST) BOAST 12, with the aim of reducing morbidity by standardising care of these injuries. The primary aim of the AUGMENT study was to determine the extent and clinical effect of variation from BOAST 12. METHODS: AUGMENT was a multi-centre prospective trainee led audit of consecutive patients presenting with an ankle fracture within a four-week period. Data were collected on patient demographics, comorbidities, management and 12-week outcome. The BOAST 12 standards were divided into four subgroups; documentation, imaging, management and follow-up. Percentage compliance with each subgroup was analysed. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine impact of overall compliance on likelihood of discharge in follow-up period. FINDINGS: 971 patients were included across 52 sites. The overall rate of BOAST 12 compliance was 41.7%. Variations in practice were observed in clinical documentation, especially of neurovascular status, (40.7%) and VTE assessment (61.5%). Patient management compliance with all 16 of the BOAST 12 standards was associated with a higher rate of discharge during the 12-week follow-up period (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: AUGMENT has demonstrated that the management of ankle fractures is variable across the UK. Over half of patients had aspects of their care that were not BOAST 12 compliant. When compliance was observed, it was associated with earlier discharge from orthopaedic care.

A systematic review of pre-hospital shoulder reduction techniques for anterior shoulder dislocation and the effect on patient return to function.

PURPOSE: The majority of acute anterior shoulder dislocations are sustained during sports and wilderness activities. The management of acute dislocations in the pre-hospital setting is currently without guidelines based on the evidence. The study aims to assess the risk of acute complications in pre-hospital shoulder reduction and identify which pre-hospital reduction technique has the highest success rate in the published literature. METHODS: The involved databases were Allied and Complementary Medicine, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, Europe PMC, Ovid MEDLINE®, Pedro, Proquest, Trip, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry platform. Only original research of high methodological quality was included, which was defined by the recently developed assessment tool-assessing the methodological quality of published papers (AMQPP) and investigated the management of acute anterior shoulder dislocations in the pre-hospital setting. RESULTS: Two hundred and ninety-eight articles were identified and screened. A full text review was performed on 40 articles. Four articles published between 2015 and 2018 met the inclusion criteria. A total of 181 patients were included with the study duration ranging from 6 to 60 months. All studies reported zero immediate complication following pre-hospital reduction and there were no documented subsequent adverse events regardless of the technique used. Prompt resolution of neurological symptoms was observed following the early and successful pre-hospital reduction. First attempt success rate, when performed by skilled practitioners, ranged from 72.3% to 94.9%. CONCLUSION: Pre-hospital shoulder reduction appears to be a safe and feasible option when carried out with the appropriate expertise. A novel reduction technique adapted from the mountain medicine diploma course at the University of Paris North was found to have the highest first attempt reduction success rate of 94.9%. Other techniques described in the literature included Hippocratic, Stimson's, Counter-traction and external rotation with the success rates ranging from 54% to 71.7%.

The Validation of Surgical Simulators: A Technical Report on Current Validation Terminology as a Reference for Future Research.

In recent years, surgical trainees have been exposed to a lower volume of operative procedures. In part, this is due to the reduction in working hours and further disruption by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Much has been done to develop the techniques of surgical skill training outside of the operating theatre. Simulation-based interventions must undergo a process of validation to assess their appropriateness and effectiveness for use in training. The terminology of validation within current literature, however, has not evolved in line with the education community, resulting in varying definitions for the same phrase across domains. This can result in confusion and misinterpretation among researchers and surgeons working within this domain. This technical report describes the "types of validity" definitions used in the traditional framework of surgical simulation literature and the contemporary, unitary framework of validity adopted by educationalist theorists. There is a clear overlap between the traditional "types of validity" and the contemporary, unitary framework. The divergence in the use of those definitions seems, at least partly, influenced by the context of the investigations being conducted. By utilising the contemporary definitions, authors may have struggled to provide the evidence required to justify the use of the multitude of surgical skill simulators developed in the recent past. This report has provided an overview of the current terminology within the validation frameworks and can be used as a reference for future surgical simulation research.

The 'National Finals Revision Day' Teaching Strategy: A Cost-Effective Way to Pass Medical School 'Finals' and Upskill Junior Doctors.

Courses to help medical students pass 'Finals' already exist but are typically expensive or can only be attended by a limited number of students. We describe the success of 'The National Finals Revision Day' (NFRD) course, which we believe is sustainable and unique in terms of its combined scale and cost (£10 per person). The course was organised and taught by 12 junior doctors. In total, 300 students attended from 55% of UK medical schools. Attendees found the course both relevant (96.4%) and cost-effective (97%), whilst the 11 medical and surgical talks were of a high standard (90.1%). The organising committee felt confident to organise their own teaching course in the future with 100% having already run a course themselves since the NFRD course. The NFRD course was also used by 11/12 (91.7%) of the organising committee to achieve their Annual Review of Competency Progression (ARCP) and 12/12 (100%) of the organising committee to obtain jobs on training programmes in the UK. We provide guidance about how to organise similar large-scale events for those interested. Moving forward, the teaching course will be run at: (i) multiple times; (ii) multiple UK venues; (iii) run over two days to cover more medical and surgical topics; and (iv) include the option of attending via video link.