RESUMO
Introduction: In starting a new clinical placement, doctors in training must become aware of and apply standard operating procedures, as well as learn guidelines, simultaneously adjusting to new patient presentations, environments and personnel. This transition is thought to correlate with increased risk to patient safety, notably during the annual UK changeover. Mobile technologies are increasingly commonplace throughout the National Health Service. Clinicians at all levels are employing medical technology and applications (apps) with minimal local guidance. We set out to test the feasibility and utility of offering medical apps to out-of-hours (OOH) practitioners as an aid to clinical decision-making at point of patient contact. The theorised benefits were threefold: clinical education-real time support for clinical decision-making as one component of deliberate practice to build expert performance; decreased administrative burden-updating and accessing current guidelines; and service development-readily accessible feedback from users. Method: We provided 32 devices in our emergency departments and OOH environments. The devices were preloaded with apps approved by our medical education department and clinical service leads to be used in support of care delivery. Results: We surveyed 123 clinical staff prior to the pilot discovering that 65% had used mobile apps to aid their decision-making. During our project, we saw the number of clinical users expand with our data series, suggesting the apps most useful to care delivery for this group of service providers. Future developments: There was huge enthusiasm for the project and we hope to maintain a clinician-led environment.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The morbidity, mortality and survival following a laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer are equivalent to an open operation. However, the cost of a longer operating time and consumables may offset savings from a shorter length of stay (LOS). A cost minimization study was undertaken to compare the relative costs. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of consecutive elective right hemicolectomies for colon cancer performed over 5 years by two teams. One team performed an open operation (OG), the other intended to perform all operations laparoscopically (LG). Clinical outcomes and relative costs were evaluated. Results expressed as mean ± SEM. RESULTS: There were 58 patients in the open group and 56 in the first intention laparoscopic group, of which 77% were completed laparoscopically. There was no difference in age, gender or cancer stage. The complications, mortality and 5-year survival were similar. Anaesthetic (LG = 63 ± 3, OG = 62 ± 2 min) and surgical times (LG = 144 ± 8, OG = 143 ± 5 min) were similar. Consumables cost 571 more and the total theatre cost was 643 ± 256 higher in the laparoscopic group compared with the open group (p = 0.01). The LOS in the laparoscopic group (4.6 ± 0.5 days) was less than in the open group (8.3 ± 1 days, p < 0.01) saving 1960 ± 636 per patient. Overall, first intention laparoscopic right hemicolectomies saved 1316 ± 733 per patient. A probability sensitivity analysis indicated a 62% probability that a laparoscopic right hemicolectomy was cheaper than an open operation. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is oncologically equivalent but less costly and should be considered the procedure of choice for right-sided colon cancer unless contraindicated.
RESUMO
Locally acquired HEV infection is increasingly recognized in developed countries. Anti-HEV IgG seroprevalence has been shown to be high in haemodialysis patients in a number of previous studies, employing assays of uncertain sensitivity. The aim of this study was to investigate anti-HEV IgG seroprevalence in recipients of haemodialysis and renal transplants compared to a control group using a validated, highly sensitive assay. Eighty-eight patients with functioning renal transplants and 76 receiving chronic haemodialysis were tested for HEV RNA and anti-HEV IgG and IgM. Six hundred seventy controls were tested for anti-HEV IgG. Anti-HEV IgG was positive in 28/76 (36.8%) of haemodialysis and 16/88 (18.2%) of transplant patients. HEV RNA was not found in any patient. 126/670 (18.8%) of control subjects were anti-HEV IgG positive. After adjusting for age and sex, there was a significantly higher anti-HEV IgG seroprevalence amongst haemodialysis patients compared to controls (OR = 1.97, 95% CI = 1.16-3.31, P = 0.01) or transplant recipients (OR = 2.63, 95% CI = 1.18-6.07, P = 0.02). Patients with a functioning transplant showed no difference in anti-HEV IgG seroprevalence compared to controls. The duration of haemodialysis or receipt of blood products were not significant risk factors for HEV IgG positivity. Patients receiving haemodialysis have a higher seroprevalence of anti-HEV IgG than both age- and sex-matched controls and a cohort of renal transplant patients. None of the haemodialysis patients had evidence of chronic infection. The reason haemodialysis patients have a high seroprevalence remains uncertain and merits further study.
