Improving the working environment for the delivery of safe surgical care in the UK: a qualitative cross-sectional analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify current problems and potential solutions to improve the working environment for the delivery of safe surgical care in the UK. DESIGN: Prospective, questionnaire-based cross-sectional study. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Following validation, an electronic questionnaire was distributed to postgraduate local education and training board distribution lists, the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh (RCSEd) mailing lists and trainee organisations. This consisted of a single open-ended question inviting five open-ended responses. Throughout the 13-week study period, the survey was also published on a number of social media platforms. RESULTS: A total of 505 responders completed the survey, of which 35% were consultants, 30% foundation doctors, 17% specialty trainees, 11% specialty doctors, 5% core trainees and <1% surgical nurse practitioners. A total of 2238 free-text answers detailed specific actions to improve the working environment. These responses were individually coded and then grouped into nine categories (staff resources, non-staff resources, support, working conditions, communication and team work, systems improvement, patient centred, training and education, and miscellaneous). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study have identified a number of key areas that, if addressed, may improve the environment for the delivery of safer surgical care. Common themes that emerged across all grades included: increased front-line staff; a return to a 'firm' structure to improve team continuity; greater senior support; and improved hospital facilities to help staff rest and recuperate. While unlimited funding remains unrealistic, many of the suggestions could be implemented in a cost-neutral fashion and include insightful ideas for remodelling or restructuring the workforce to improve the efficiency of the surgical team. The findings of this study formed the basis of a set of recommendations published by the RCSEd as a discussion paper.

Current margin practice and effect on re-excision rates following the publication of the SSO-ASTRO consensus and ABS consensus guidelines: a national prospective study of 2858 women undergoing breast-conserving therapy in the UK and Ireland.

INTRODUCTION: There is variation in margin policy for breast conserving therapy (BCT) in the UK and Ireland. In response to the Society of Surgical Oncology and American Society for Radiation Oncology (SSO-ASTRO) margin consensus ('no ink on tumour' for invasive and 2 mm for ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS]) and the Association of Breast Surgery (ABS) consensus (1 mm for invasive and DCIS), we report on current margin practice and unit infrastructure in the UK and Ireland and describe how these factors impact on re-excision rates. METHODS: A trainee collaborative-led multicentre prospective study was conducted in the UK and Ireland between 1st February and 31st May 2016. Data were collected on consecutive BCT patients and on local infrastructure and policies. RESULTS: A total of 79 sites participated in the data collection (75% screening units; average 372 cancers annually, range 70-900). For DCIS, 53.2% of units accept 1 mm and 38% accept 2-mm margins. For invasive disease 77.2% accept 1 mm and 13.9% accept 'no ink on tumour'. A total of 2858 patients underwent BCT with a mean re-excision rate of 17.2% across units (range 0-41%). The re-excision rate would be reduced to 15% if all units applied SSO-ASTRO guidelines and to 14.8% if all units followed ABS guidelines. Of those who required re-operation, 65% had disease present at margin. CONCLUSION: There continues to be large variation in margin policy and re-excision rates across units. Altering margin policies to follow either SSO-ASTRO or ABS guidelines would result in a modest reduction in the national re-excision rate. Most re-excisions are for involved margins rather than close margins.