The impact of COVID-19 safety interventions on creating a controlled environment on campus.

Objectives: During COVID-19 the re-opening of educational institutes was frequently debated, however with the decline in the number of COVID-19 cases, The Aga Khan University (AKU) in Karachi, Pakistan opened its campus for medical and nursing students after more than 6 months of closure. To ensure gradual resumption of activities on-campus, a combination of interventions was diligently deployed to minimize student infection rates. Scarce literature exists on students' perceptions regarding decisions implemented by university leadership. The aim of the study was to determine the efficacy of these interventions. Methods: We conducted a convergent, parallel, mixed-methods observational study targeting medical and nursing students. An online questionnaire was disseminated to elicit students' degree of (dis)agreement on a four-point Likert scale. Focused group discussions (FGDs) were conducted to comprehend reasons for (dis)agreement. Results: Total of 183 students responded to questionnaire (59.0% nursing, 67.8% female), 11 FGDs were conducted with 85 students. Interventions with highest agreement were mandatory face masks policy (94.54%), weekly mandated COVID-testing (92.35%) and students' Academic Bubble (91.26%); highest disagreement was for Sehat Check application (41.53%); and stay strong campaign (40.44%). Four themes emerged from FGDs: Effective safety interventions, Safety interventions with limited effectiveness, Utility of Sehat Check Application and Future recommendations for informing policy. Conclusion: It is paramount to seek student-feedback at forefront of university re-opening strategy. Clear communication channels are as important as an administrative response system's robustness. Bidirectional communication channels are fundamental and requisite during ever-changing policies and regulations. Engaging student representatives in decision making or implementation processes (such as "pilot" before "roll-out") would allow any potential issues to be managed early on. Gather real-time anonymous feedback and identify key areas that need further promulgation and those that need to be replaced with more effective ones.

Non-technical skills training to enhance performance of obstetrics and gynaecology residents in the operating room.

The importance of incorporating non-technical skills in surgical training cannot be understated, however, these remain non-core components of training. The aim of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a training course in improving residents' non-technical skills performance in the operating room. Twenty-eight eligible Obstetrics and Gynaecology residents were divided into conventional and experimental groups by using blocked randomisation. The experimental group received a training course comprising of 20 h over 5 weeks as an educational intervention. A blinded assessor assessed non-technical skill performance by using non-technical skill for surgeons rating system while performing two procedures evacuation and curettage and elective caesarean section in pretest and post-test phase. The post-test results of experimental training group improved significantly in all four categories: situational awareness, decision-making, communication and leadership than the conventional training group demonstrating the effectiveness of a training course. Participants found the course useful and relevant to their practices and strongly recommended the incorporation of similar courses in early years of training. Impact Statement What is already known on this subject? Operating room is the mainstay of surgeons and the majority of the studies done in the operating room relate to structured courses to teach residents about non-technical skills, with training and evaluation done on the same day. These either explores the perception of trainees, expansion of the cognitive component and/or feasibility of training for non-technical skills. To date, there is a lack of evidence in the literature to address questions regarding the appropriate time to incorporate non-technical skills in the curriculum, due to study designs. This highlights the need for more randomised control trials with different curricular designs to evaluate effectiveness. What do the results of this study add? The results of our study enable a comparative analysis between learning curves of conventional training, with the experimental group demonstrating the effectiveness of a training course. This strongly supports implementation of non-technical training in postgraduate competency-based curricula. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? This study shall be used as an evidence-based source to design curricula for teaching non-technical skills to residents.