The hidden costs of the intercollegiate membership of the Royal College of surgeons examinations: Can trainees afford it?

BACKGROUND: The Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination is a mandatory requirement for higher specialty surgical training in the UK. However, there is a significant economic impact on trainees which raises the question of whether the costs of this exam hinder surgical career progression. This study explores the burden of these exams on trainees. METHODS: A 37-point questionnaire was distributed to all trainees who were preparing for or have sat MRCS examinations. Univariate analyses included the cost of the preparatory resources, extra hours worked to pay for these and the examinations, and the number of annual leave (AL) days taken to prepare. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to identify possible correlation between monetary expenditure and success rate. RESULTS: On average, trainees (n â€‹= â€‹145) spent £332.54, worked 31.2 â€‹h in addition to their rostered hours, and used 5.8 AL days to prepare for MRCS Part A. For MRCS Part B/ENT, trainees spent on average £682.92, worked 41.7 extra hours, and used 5 AL days. Overall, the average trainee spent 5-9% of their salary and one-fifth of their AL allowance to prepare for the exams. There was a positive correlation between number of attempts and monetary expenditure on Part A preparation (r(109)=0.536, p â€‹< â€‹0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There is a considerable financial and social toll of the MRCS examination on trainees. Reducing this is crucial to tackle workforce challenges that include trainee retention and burnout. Further studies exploring study habits can help reform study budget policies to ease this pressure on trainees.

Surgical trainee experience and opinion of robotic surgery in surgical training and vision for the future: a snapshot study of pan-specialty surgical trainees.

BACKGROUND:  Robotic surgery is well established across multiple surgical specialities in the United Kingdom (UK) and Republic of Ireland (ROI). We aimed to elucidate current surgical trainee experience of and attitudes to robotic surgery in a surgical training programme across the UK and ROI to determine the future role of robotic surgery in international surgical training programmes. Methods: A pan-specialty trainee cross-sectional study was performed on behalf of the Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) using mixed-methodology. Round 1: a digital questionnaire was disseminated to all ASiT members. Round 2: 'live-polling' was performed prior to and following the Robotic Surgery plenary session convened at the ASiT 2020 International Conference (Birmingham). Data analysis was performed using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods. RESULTS:  Three hundred and four responses were analysed (n = 244 digital questionnaire, n = 60 live-polling). Overall, 73.8% (n = 180) of trainees would value greater access to robotic surgery training. 73.4% (n = 179) believed that robotic surgery was important for the future of their desired specialty and 77.2% (n = 156) believed it should be incorporated into formal surgical training. Qualitative analysis identified that trainees believe that robotic training should have a formal role in surgical training. Perceived disadvantages of robotic surgery experience in surgical training included expense and the current impact of consultant robotic learning curves on training. CONCLUSION:  Current surgical trainees desire greater access to robotic surgery in surgical training. Robotic surgery is developing an increasing role in current surgical practice and it is important that it is introduced in a timely, evidence-based fashion to surgical trainees at an appropriate stage of training.

Bilirubin is a specific marker for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis.

Total serum bilirubin and other biochemical parameters have been associated with acute appendicitis, mainly in complicated cases. The present study aimed to evaluate the role of biochemical parameters in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, and to further investigate the role of bilirubin as a diagnostic marker irrespective of the severity of the pathology. All recorded cases of appendicectomies in a 1-year period in a single institution were reviewed. The median values of white cell count, C-reactive protein and total serum bilirubin on admission were associated with final histology, and their respective rates of abnormal and normal values were compared between patients who were proven to have negative histology and patients who were proven to have acute appendicitis. A total of 300 patients were studied. Median total serum bilirubin, white cell count and C-reactive protein on admission were significantly associated with acute appendicitis (P<0.001). Respective rates of normal and abnormal values were significantly associated with final histology (P<0.001). Total serum bilirubin demonstrated higher specificity (0.88) but lower sensitivity (0.26) and diagnostic accuracy (0.40) for acute appendicitis. In conclusion, total serum bilirubin on admission should be considered in the diagnostic workup to confirm rather than exclude appendicitis, without focusing on subgroups of specific severity of the disease. White cell count and C-reactive protein may also contribute to the diagnostic work-up, although with limited accuracy.

Postoperative outcomes in laparoscopic appendicectomies with histopathologically normal appendix.

AIM: Although still debatable, appendicectomy during laparoscopy in patients with abdominal pain is often performed even if the appendix seems normal. The study's aim is to compare the postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic appendicectomies with appendix proven to be histologically normal to those with proven appendicitis, adding evidence on whether a normal appendix should be removed. METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic appendicectomy in a one-year period in a single centre were retrospectively studied. Comparison was attempted between patients with negative and positive histology with regards to their postoperative outcomes (length of stay and postoperative complications). RESULTS: Out of 134 patients included in the study, ten patients developed postoperative complications (7.5%), 42 patients had negative histology (31.3%), 92 patients had positive histology (68.7%) and six (14.3%) and four patients (4.3%) respectively from each group developed post-operative complications. No statistically significant difference was found regarding morbidity, length of stay and Clavien-Dindo grading of complications between the two groups. DISCUSSION: Morbidity and length of stay in laparoscopic appendicectomy with normal appendix are not inferior to those with histologically confirmed appendicitis and thus should not be disregarded when considering a routine appendicectomy. CONCLUSION: The final decision to remove a normal appendix in laparoscopy for abdominal pain should be based on the individual clinical scenario and surgeon's experience. KEY WORDS: Acute appendicitis, Histology, Length of Stay, Morbidity.

Is ultrasound a reliable diagnostic tool for acute appendicitis? A single centre experience.

AIM: Aim of the present study is to evaluate the utility of US as a diagnostic method for acute appendicitis (AA) in a district general hospital, by use of accurate quality indices. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The records of all patients who underwent an appendicectomy in a one year period in a single centre were reviewed. The patients who underwent a preoperative US scan were included in the study in accordance to specific criteria and the results were statistically compared to the final surgical histology. RESULTS: 137 patients who underwent an US were included in the study, with 69 patients (23%) presenting a negative histology result. Overall, the US results correlated statistically significantly with the final histology results, with a specificity of 0.87, a sensitivity of 0.34 and an overall diagnostic accuracy of 0.51. DISCUSSION: The results of the study are comparable with the reported literature, presenting high specificity but a relatively low sensitivity, although great variability exists in the literature. US seems useful in confirming rather than excluding AA. CONCLUSION: In view of its advantages, the incorporation of ultrasonography into routine clinical practice when performed by an expert is recommended, but only in support of other diagnostic elements. The issue of low sensitivity should be further addressed. KEY WORDS: Appendicectomy, Diagnostic accuracy, Histology.