Mortality from anti-personnel mines before and during the Colombian peace process / Mortalidad secundaria a minas antipersona antes y durante el proceso de paz colombiano

Abstract Introduction: Although the peace process in Colombia resulted in a significant reduction in the number of anti-personnel mines across the country, there are no reliable data on the effects of this phenomenon on outcomes for patients who were victims of these devices. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess mortality from landmine injuries before and during the Colombian peace process. Furthermore possible associations between peace negotiations and mortality were explored. Methods: For this study, we used the "Colombian Victims of Antipersonnel Mines Injuries registry" (MAP/MUSE database) data from 2002 to 2018. This registry was launched in 2001 by the government of Colombia with the aim of prospectively and systematically collect information on all the cases of anti-personnel mine injuries in the country. The period between 2002-2012 was classified as the pre-negotiation period (período de guerra), and 2014-2018 as the peace negotiations period, with 2013 classified as a washout year. Multivariate logistic regression was used to explore the association between peace negotiations and mortality among anti-personnel landmine injured individuals. Results: A total of 10306 landmine injury cases were registered. Of these, 1180 (11.4%) occurred in the peace-negotiation period. Mortality was significantly lower during the period of peace negotiations. After adjusting for sex, age group, race, active duty soldier status, rural area, and geographic Departamentos case volumes, the peace negotiation period was found to be associated with lower risk-adjusted odds of mortality after suffering a landmine injury (OR= 0.6, 95% CI, 0.5-0.7; p<0.001). Conclusions: Our findings suggest an association between the period of peace negotiation and a lower likelihood of mortality among victims of anti-personnel landmines.

Resumen Introducción: Aunque el proceso de paz colombiano produjo una reducción en la cantidad de minas antipersona en el país, no hay estimativos sobre el efecto de este fenómeno en los desenlaces de los pacientes víctimas de estos artefactos. Objetivo: Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar la mortalidad por minas antipersona antes y durante la negociación del proceso de paz en Colombia. Además, exploramos posibles asociaciones entre las negociaciones de paz y la mortalidad. Métodos: Para este estudio utilizamos los datos del "Registro de víctimas colombianas de lesiones de minas antipersona" (base de datos MAP / MUSE) de 2002 a 2018. Este registro fue lanzado en 2001 por el gobierno de Colombia con el objetivo de recolectar información de manera prospectiva y sistemática de los casos de trauma por minas antipersona en el país. Clasificamos el período comprendido entre 2002 y 2012 como el período previo a la negociación (período de guerra), el comprendido entre 2014 y 2018 como el período de negociaciones de paz y el año 2013 como período de "depuración". Se utilizaron modelos de regresión logística multivariados para explorar las asociaciones entre las negociaciones de paz y la mortalidad. Resultados: Se registraron un total de 10306 casos de lesiones por minas antipersona. De estos, 1180 (11.4%) ocurrieron en el período de negociación de paz. La mortalidad fue significativamente menor durante el período de negociaciones de paz. El análisis de regresión logística multivariado determinó que el período de negociación de paz se asoció con una menor probabilidad de mortalidad después de sufrir una lesión por minas antipersona (OR = 0,6, IC 95%, 0,5-0,7; p <0,001). Conclusiones: Nuestros hallazgos sugieren una asociación entre el período de negociación de paz y una menor probabilidad de mortalidad entre las víctimas de las minas antipersona.

The tenets of intrathoracic packing during damage control thoracic surgery for trauma patients: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Although Damage Control Thoracic Surgery (DCTS) has become a provocative alternative to treat patients with chest injuries who are critically ill and physiologically depleted, the management approaches of chest-packing and the measurement of clinically relevant outcomes are not well established. In this paper, we systematically reviewed the available knowledge and evidence about intra-thoracic packing during DCTS for trauma patients. We furthermore inform on the management approaches, surgical strategies, and mortality associated with this intervention. METHODS: We identified articles in MEDLINE and SCOPUS. We reviewed all studies that included trauma patients with chest injuries and managed with intrathoracic packing during DCTS. Studies were eligible if the use of intrathoracic packing in trauma populations was reported. RESULTS: We identified 14 studies with a total of 211 patients. Overall, intrathoracic packing was used in 131 trauma patients. Packing was most commonly used to arrest persistent coagulopathic bleeding or oozing either from raw surfaces or repaired structures and in conjunction with other operative techniques. Pneumonectomy was a deadly intervention; however, one study reported survivors when pneumonectomy was deferred. CONCLUSION: Packing is a feasible, reliable and potentially effective complementary method for hemorrhage control. Therefore, we recommend that packing can be used liberally as a complement to rapid lung-sparing techniques.

A Scoping Review of Peer Support Writing Groups in Academic Medicine as a Valuable Tool for Physician-Scientists in the Publish or Perish Era.

In designing and implementing a peer support writing group for junior researchers at our home institution, we saw an opportunity to advance the understanding of this intervention as a valuable tool for future physician-scientists. We, therefore, performed a scoping literature review of the available literature on peer support writing groups in clinical disciplines to learn what has been described about this topic. We paid specific attention to the characteristics, implementation, and impact of these groups on the academic development of medical/healthcare scientists. We performed a scoping literature review following the conceptual framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley. We included studies describing the characteristics, implementation, and impact/effects of peer support writing groups in clinical disciplines. All the information extracted was summarized descriptively to chart the available literature on peer support writing groups in clinical disciplines. We identified a total of 369 articles, of which six were finally included. The absolute number of papers published increased considerably after the participation in the peer support writing groups. The subjective comments of the participating individuals highlighted the positive effects of these groups on the academic productivity of attendees. Available information shows a significant increase in the absolute number of publications and a positive perception between individuals participating in peer support writing groups. Stakeholders should implement this strategy in their home academic institutions.