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.

Tourniquet use for people with peripheral arterial disease undergoing major lower limb amputations.

BACKGROUND: At least 7000 major lower limb amputations (MLLAs) are performed in the UK each year, 80% of which are due to peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Intraoperative blood loss can have a deleterious effect on patient outcomes, and its replacement with transfused blood is not without risk. Tourniquets can be used in lower limb surgical procedures to provide a bloodless surgical field, minimise intraoperative blood loss, and reduce perioperative blood transfusion requirements. Although their safety has been demonstrated in certain orthopaedic operations, their use among people with PAD undergoing MLLA remains controversial. Many clinicians are concerned about tourniquets potentially compromising perfusion of the stump and thereby impacting wound healing through direct tissue injury, damage to the arterial supply of the wound, or both. OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and effectiveness of tourniquet use in people undergoing MLLA for complications of PAD, specifically with regard to intraoperative blood loss, change in haemoglobin levels, transfusion rates, wound healing, need for revision surgery, and postoperative complications including mortality. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers from inception to 17 May 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tourniquet use to no tourniquet use among people with PAD undergoing MLLA. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Primary outcomes were intraoperative blood loss, fall in haemoglobin levels, and perioperative blood transfusion requirement. Secondary outcomes were primary wound-healing rates, stump revision rates, other postoperative complications defined as per Clavien-Dindo classification, and postoperative mortality at 30 days and at maximal follow-up. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: One RCT met our inclusion criteria, which was a prospective randomised blinded controlled trial conducted in Sheffield, UK in 2006. In total 64 participants undergoing transtibial amputation for non-reconstructable PAD were randomised to either tourniquet or no tourniquet to assess for intraoperative blood loss, fall in haemoglobin, transfusion requirement, wound healing, stump breakdown and revision. Ten participants were excluded postrandomisation (five from the tourniquet group and five from the no tourniquet group). The reported median volume of intraoperative blood loss was significantly less in the tourniquet group (255 mL (interquartile range (IQR) 150 to 572.5 mL))) compared to the control group (550 mL (IQR 255 to 1050 mL)) (P = 0.014). There was a significantly lower median drop in haemoglobin concentration in the tourniquet group (1.0 g/dL (IQR 0.6 to 2.4 g/dL)) compared to the control group (1.8 g/dL (IRQ 0 to 1.2 g/dL)) (P = 0.035). There was a significantly lower perioperative blood transfusion requirement in the tourniquet group (8 participants, 32%) compared to the control group (14 participants, 48%) (P = 0.047). There were no clear differences in wound breakdown, stump revision, primary wound healing at six weeks, postoperative complications (myocardial infarction, cardiac arrhythmias, pulmonary oedema), and death between groups. We assessed the one included study as at low risk of bias for sequence generation and blinding of outcome assessors; high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data and selective outcome reporting; and unclear risk of bias for allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel, and other sources of bias. We assessed the certainty of the evidence as low or very low due to risk of bias, small sample size, and the study being insufficiently powered for most outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review identified only one small historical RCT evaluating tourniquet use in MLLA. Tourniquets appeared to reduce intraoperative blood loss, drop in haemoglobin, and blood transfusion requirements following transtibial amputations for people with PAD. However, it is unclear whether tourniquets affect wound healing, stump revision rates, postoperative complications, or mortality. High-certainty evidence is required to inform clinical decision-making for the use of tourniquets in these patients.

Liberal or restrictive antimicrobial prophylaxis for surgical site infection: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial prophylaxis is widely used to prevent surgical site infection. Amid growing concern about antimicrobial resistance, we determined the effectiveness of antimicrobial prophylaxis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and WHO-ICTRP between January 1, 1990 and January 1, 2020 for trials randomising adults undergoing surgery to liberal (more doses) or restrictive (fewer or no doses) perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. Pairs of researchers reviewed articles and extracted data, and a senior author resolved discrepancies. The primary outcome measure was surgical site infection or bacteriuria for urological procedures. We calculated average risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals and prediction intervals (PI) using random effects models, and present risk ratios (RR). We assessed evidence certainty using GRADE methodology, and risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (PROSPERO: CRD42018116946). RESULTS: From 6593 records, we identified 294 trials including 86 146 patients. Surgical site infection occurred in 2237/44 113 (5.1%) patients receiving liberal prophylaxis vs 2889/42 033 (6.9%) receiving restrictive prophylaxis (RD -0.01 [-0.02 to -0.01]; relative risk 0.72 [0.67-0.77]; I2=52%, PI -0.05-0.02). There was a small benefit of prophylaxis in 161 trials comparing no prophylaxis with ≥1 dose (RD -0.02 [-0.03 to -0.02]; RR 0.58 [0.52-0.65]; I2=62%, PI -0.06-0.02). Treatment effect varied from a strong effect in urology to no benefit in 7/19 specialities. Tests for publication bias suggest 62 unreported trials and evidence certainty was very low. Treatment harms were reported in 43/294 trials. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials revealed that more liberal antimicrobial prophylaxis is associated with a small reduction in the risk of surgical site infection, although antimicrobial harms are poorly reported. Further evidence about the risks of antimicrobial prophylaxis to inform current widespread use is urgently needed.

Palliative Care Interventions for Peripheral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.

Background: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) encompasses conditions with poor outcome and severe suffering, both mentally and physically, yet utilization and research into palliative care interventions remain sparse. Objective: The purpose of this study is to identify existing evidence on palliative care intervention for chronic limb threatening ischaemia (CLTI) and abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Design: We conducted a PROSPERO-registered systematic review of studies published between 1991 and 2020 in which people with PAD received palliative care interventions and at least one patient outcome was recorded. For the purpose of this study, a palliative care intervention was defined as one which aims primarily to reduce negative impact of PAD on patients' and/or caregivers' physical, emotional, psychological, social, or spiritual condition. Results: A total of 8 studies involving 87,024 patients met the inclusion criteria (4 cohort studies and 4 cross-sectional studies). Methodological quality ranged from low to moderate. The small number of studies and study heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. Regarding our primary outcomes, only two articles recorded patient-reported outcomes. Five articles found an association between palliative care and reduction in health care utilization, a secondary outcome of the study. Most of the studies reported that palliative care was likely underused. Only two of the studies included non-hospital patients. Conclusion: Despite high mortality and morbidity associated with PAD, evidence of the effectiveness of palliative care in this group of patients is lacking. There are only a handful of articles on palliative care for people with PAD, and the majority are small, methodologically flawed and lack meaningful patient-reported outcomes. High-quality research of palliative care interventions in patients with PAD is urgently needed to better understand the impact of palliative care on quality of end of life and to develop and evaluate service-level interventions.

Sensitivity of the Wound Edge Gene Signature "WD14" in Responding to Clinical Change: A Longitudinal Cohort Study.

Introduction: WounD14 (WD14) gene signature is a recently developed tool derived from genetic interrogation of wound edge biopsies of chronic venous leg ulcers to identify heard-to-heal wounds and enable clinicians to target aggressive therapies to promote wound healing. This study aimed to evaluate if changes in wound clinical healing status were detected by the WD14 gene signature over time as this is currently poorly understood. Material and methods: WD14 was developed through gene screening and subsequent validation in 3 patient cohorts involving 85 consecutive patients with chronic venous leg ulcers referred to a tertiary wound healing unit. Patients underwent a wound edge biopsy to interrogate for a "healing" or "non-healing" genotype. A smaller cohort (18%) underwent a second biopsy, which comprised this pilot cohort reported herein. Twelve weeks following biopsy, wounds were clinically assessed for healing status based on reduction in size and compared to WD14 genotype. Results: Sequential biopsies and WD14 scores were derived from 16 patients. WD14 signature predicted wound healing status among this cohort at either visit (32 wound edge biopsies) with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 85.2% (95% CI 74.1%-92.0%) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 80.0% (95% CI 34.2%-96.9%). A total of 6 wounds underwent altered clinical status between the 2 visits. In this cohort, WD14 has a PPV of 66.7% (95% CI 47.3%-81.7%) and NPV of 100%. Conclusion: Although the WD14 gene signature did change with wound healing status, larger studies are required to precisely clarify its role and ability to prognosticate wounds of differing clinical status over time.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Perineural Catheters in Major Lower Limb Amputations.

OBJECTIVE: Controlling pain after major lower limb amputation (MLLA) is of critical importance to patients and clinicians. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effect of perineural catheters (PNCs) on post-operative pain, post-operative morphine requirement, in-hospital mortality, long term phantom limb pain, and chronic stump pain. METHODS: A systematic review using PubMed, EMBASE via OVID and the Cochrane library from database inception (1946) to 20 October 2020 was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies involving patients undergoing MLLA which reported on post-operative morphine requirement, pain scores, in-hospital mortality, phantom limb pain (PLP), and chronic stump pain were included. Studies comparing PNC use with epidural or wound site local anaesthetic infusions were excluded. Outcome data were extracted from individual studies and meta-analysis was performed using a random effects (Mantel-Haenszel) model for dichotomous data using an odds ratio (OR) summary statistic with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and with an inverse variance random effects model for continuous data using a standardised mean difference (SMD) summary statistic with 95% CIs. Sensitivity analyses were performed for post-operative pain scores and post-operative morphine requirement. Study quality was assessed using the Downs and Black score, and outcomes were assessed using the GRADE tool. RESULTS: Ten studies reporting on 731 patients were included, with 350 patients receiving a PNC and 381 receiving standard care. PNC use is associated with a reduction in post-operative pain (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.58 - -0.01, p = .040, I2 = 54%, GRADE quality of evidence: low) and post-operative morphine requirements (SMD -0.63, 95% CI -1.03 - -0.23, p = .002, I2 = 75%, GRADE quality of evidence: moderate), although the effect of PNC on reduced post-operative morphine requirements is lost on sensitivity analysis of randomised trials only (p = .40). No demonstrable effect was found on in-hospital mortality, PLP, or chronic stump pain (GRADE quality of evidence: low). CONCLUSION: PNC use in amputees is associated with a significant reduction in post-operative pain scores and post-operative morphine requirements, although this latter finding is lost on sensitivity analysis of randomised trials only.

The perceived global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on doctors' medical and surgical training: An international survey.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a significant burden on healthcare systems causing disruption to the medical and surgical training of doctors globally. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: This is the first international survey assessing the perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the training of doctors of all grades and specialties. METHODS: An online global survey was disseminated using Survey Monkey® between 4th August 2020 and 17th November 2020. A global network of collaborators facilitated participant recruitment. Data were collated anonymously with informed consent and analysed using univariate and adjusted multivariable analyses. RESULTS: Seven hundred and forty-three doctors of median age 27 (IQR: 25-30) were included with the majority (56.8%, n = 422) being male. Two-thirds of doctors were in a training post (66.5%, n = 494), 52.9% (n = 393) in a surgical specialty and 53.0% (n = 394) in low- and middle-income countries. Sixty-nine point two percent (n = 514) reported an overall perceived negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their training. A significant decline was noted amongst non-virtual teaching methods such as face-to-face lectures, tutorials, ward-based teaching, theatre sessions, conferences, simulation sessions and morbidity and mortality meetings (P ≤ .05). Low or middle-income country doctors' training was associated with perceived inadequate supervision while performing invasive procedures under general, local or regional anaesthetic. (P ≤ .05). CONCLUSION: In addition to the detrimental impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare infrastructure, this international survey reports a widespread perceived overall negative impact on medical and surgical doctors' training globally. Ongoing adaptation and innovation will be required to enhance the approach to doctors' training and learning in order to ultimately improve patient care.

Virtual surgical education for core surgical trainees in the Yorkshire deanery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: An online teaching programme for Core Surgical Trainees (CSTs) was designed and delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility and the reception of a fully online teaching programme. METHODS: Twenty teaching sessions were delivered either via Zoom™ or were pre-recorded and uploaded onto a Google Classroom™ and YouTube™ website. Online feedback, delivered via Google Forms™, were completed by CSTs following each teaching session. YouTube Studio™ analytics were used to understand patterns in viewing content. RESULTS: 89.9% of trainees were satisfied with the teaching series. Trainees preferred short, weekly sessions (79%), delivered by senior surgeons, in the form of both didactical and interactive teaching. YouTube analytics revealed that the highest peak in views was documented on the weekend before the deadline for evidence upload on the Intercollegiate Surgical Collegiate Programme (ISCP) portfolio. CONCLUSION: An entirely online teaching programme is feasible and well-received by CSTs. Trainees preferred live, interactive, procedure-based, consultant-led sessions lasting approximately thirty minutes to one hour and covering a myriad of surgical specialties. This feedback can be used to improve future online surgical teaching regionally and nationally in order to gain training opportunities lost during the pandemic.

Prophylactic antibiotic use following cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of prophylactic/ early antibiotics (intervention group) compared with clinically driven/ delayed antibiotics (control group) on patient and infectious outcomes in adult cardiac arrest patients admitted to hospital. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE (1946-current), EMBASE (1947-current) and the Cochrane library (inception-current) on 8th May 2018. Additional citations were identified through forward and backward citation tracking. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts. We included observational and interventional primary research studies with a concurrent or retrospective control group that were relevant to our study objective. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted data using a piloted data extraction form. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for randomised controlled trials or the GRADE tool for risk of bias in observational studies. Overall evidence quality for each outcome was assessed using the GRADE system. DATA SYNTHESIS: Databases searches and citation tracking identified 6825 citations, of which ten citations containing 11 studies (3 randomised controlled trials, 8 observational studies) were eligible for inclusion. Data were summarised in meta-analyses using random-effect models. The intervention was not associated with increased survival (odds ratio 1.16, 95% CI 0.97-1.40), survival with good neurological outcome (odds ratio 2.25, 95% CI 0.93-5.45), critical care length of stay (mean difference -0.6, 95% CI -3.6 to 2.4) or incidence of pneumonia (odds ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.23-1.46). Findings were generally consistent between observational studies and randomised controlled trials. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prophylaxis following cardiac arrest is not associated with a change in key clinical outcomes. Further high-quality trials may be needed to address this important clinical question. Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42016039358.

Platelet CLEC-2 protects against lung injury via effects of its ligand podoplanin on inflammatory alveolar macrophages in the mouse.

There is no therapeutic intervention proven to prevent acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Novel mechanistic insights into the pathophysiology of ARDS are therefore required. Platelets are implicated in regulating many of the pathogenic processes that occur during ARDS; however, the mechanisms remain elusive. The platelet receptor CLEC-2 has been shown to regulate vascular integrity at sites of acute inflammation. Therefore the purpose of this study was to establish the role of CLEC-2 and its ligand podoplanin in a mouse model of ARDS. Platelet-specific CLEC-2-deficient, as well as alveolar epithelial type I cell (AECI)-specific or hematopoietic-specific podoplanin deficient, mice were established using cre-loxP strategies. Combining these with intratracheal (IT) instillations of lipopolysaccharide (LPS), we demonstrate that arterial oxygen saturation decline in response to IT-LPS in platelet-specific CLEC-2-deficient mice is significantly augmented. An increase in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) neutrophils and protein was also observed 48 h post-IT-LPS, with significant increases in pro-inflammatory chemokines detected in BAL of platelet-specific CLEC-2-deficient animals. Deletion of podoplanin from hematopoietic cells but not AECIs also reduces lung function and increases pro-inflammatory chemokine expression following IT-LPS. Furthermore, we demonstrate that following IT-LPS, platelets are present in BAL in aggregates with neutrophils, which allows for CLEC-2 interaction with podoplanin expressed on BAL inflammatory alveolar macrophages. Taken together, these data suggest that the platelet CLEC-2-podoplanin signaling axis regulates the severity of lung inflammation in mice and is a possible novel target for therapeutic intervention in patients at risk of developing ARDS.