A cost-utility analysis comparing endovascular coiling to neurosurgical clipping in the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage.

Endovascular coiling (EC) has been identified in systematic reviews and meta-analyses to produce more favourable clinical outcomes in comparison to neurosurgical clipping (NC) when surgically treating a subarachnoid haemorrhage from a ruptured aneurysm. Cost-effectiveness analyses between both interventions have been done, but no cost-utility analysis has yet been published. This systematic review aims to perform an economic analysis of the relative utility outcomes and costs from both treatments in the UK. A cost-utility analysis was performed from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS), over a 1-year analytic horizon. Outcomes were obtained from the randomised International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) and measured in terms of the patient's modified Rankin scale (mRS) grade, a 6-point disability scale that aims to quantify a patient's functional outcome following a stroke. The mRS score was weighted against the Euro-QoL 5-dimension (EQ-5D), with each state assigned a weighted utility value which was then converted into quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). A sensitivity analysis using different utility dimensions was performed to identify any variation in incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) if different input variables were used. Costs were measured in pounds sterling (£) and discounted by 3.5% to 2020/2021 prices. The cost-utility analysis showed an ICER of - £144,004 incurred for every QALY gained when EC was utilised over NC. At NICE's upper willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of £30,000, EC offered a monetary net benefit (MNB) of £7934.63 and health net benefit (HNB) of 0.264 higher than NC. At NICE's lower WTP threshold of £20,000, EC offered an MNB of £7478.63 and HNB of 0.374 higher than NC. EC was found to be more 'cost-effective' than NC, with an ICER in the bottom right quadrant of the cost-effectiveness plane-indicating that it offers greater benefits at lower costs. This is supported by the ICER being below the NICE's threshold of £20,000-£30,000 per QALY, and both MNB and HNB having positive values (> 0).

A Novel Approach to Facial Reanimation and Restoration Following Radical Parotidectomies.

Background: Parotidectomies are indicated for a variety of reasons. Regardless of the indication for surgery, facial reanimation may be required because of facial nerve sacrifice or iatrogenic damage. In these cases, facial restoration performed concurrently with ablative surgery is considered the gold standard, and delayed reanimation is usually not attempted. Methods: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent parotidectomies from 2009 to 2022 in a single institution was performed. Indications, surgical techniques, and outcomes of an algorithmic template were applied to these cases using the Sunnybrook, Terzis scores, and Smile Index. A comparison was made between immediate vs. late repairs. Results: Of a total of 90 patients who underwent parotidectomy, 17 (15.3%) had a radical parotidectomy, and 73 (84.7%) had a total or superficial parotidectomy. Among those who underwent complete removal of the gland and nerve sacrifice, eight patients (47.1%) had facial restoration. There were four patients each in the immediate (n = 4) and late repair (n = 4) groups. Surgical techniques ranged from cable grafts to vascularized cross facial nerve grafts (sural communicating nerve flap as per the Koshima procedure) and vascularized nerve flaps (chimeric vastus lateralis and anterolateral thigh flaps, and superficial circumflex perforator flap with lateral femoral cutaneous nerve). Conclusions: The algorithm between one technique and another should take into consideration age, comorbidities, soft tissue defects, presence of facial nerve branches for reinnervation, and donor site morbidity. While immediate facial nerve repair is ideal, there is still benefit in performing a delayed repair in this algorithm.

A Comparison of Outcomes between Finger and Pulp Replantation/Revascularization in a Single Center.

Supermicrosurgery has allowed the replantation/revascularization of the pulp, but how does this currently compare with more proximal digit replantation/revascularization? Methods: In a retrospective case study over a 5-year period at our institute, a total of 21 patients (n = 21) had either finger or pulp replantation-revascularization posttrauma. All pulp replants had a single-vessel anastomosis viz., "artery-to-artery" or "artery-to-vein" only, with venous outflow dependent on the skin-shave technique, while more proximal replants had both arterial and venous anastomoses. Age, sex, ischemic time, handedness, smoker status, and injury-replant interval were compared between the two groups, with all procedures performed by a single surgeon. The outcome parameters studied were length of hospital stay, timeline for wound healing, viability, and functional outcomes. Results: Our patients consisted of 18 men and three women, of which 14.3% were smokers and 85.7% were right-handed. There were 11 finger replantation/revascularizations (n = 11) versus 10 pulp replantation/revascularizations (n = 10). The average age of digit replantation/revascularization patients was 44.8 years compared with 26.4 years in pulp replantation/revascularization patients (Student t test, P = 0.04). Mean ischemia time in digital replants was 67 minutes versus 32.3 minutes in pulp replantation/revascularization (Student t test, P = 0.056). Digital replantation/revascularization was viable in 72% of cases versus a 90% viability in the pulp subcohort. Conclusions: In our patient cohort, pulp replantation/revascularizations produced better postoperative viability. Where supermicrosurgery expertise is available, pulp replantation/revascularization should be considered a worthwhile option when compared with digital replantation/revascularization.

Factors underpinning an improved menopausal experience in the workplace for doctors: a UK-based qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: A recent British Medical Association survey revealed that very few National Health Service (NHS) doctors felt comfortable discussing symptoms with their managers, and many feel unable to make changes to their working lives to accommodate their menopause. An improved menopausal experience (IME) in the workplace has been associated with increased job satisfaction, increased economic participation and reduced absenteeism. Currently, existing literature fails to explore menopausal doctors' experiences and none factors in non-menopausal colleagues' perspectives. This qualitative study aims to determine the factors underpinning an IME for UK doctors. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews and thematic analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Menopausal doctors (n=21) and non-menopausal (n=20) doctors including men. SETTING: General practices and hospitals in the UK. RESULTS: Four overarching themes underpinning an IME were identified: menopausal knowledge and awareness, openness to discussion, organisational culture, and supported personal autonomy. The levels of knowledge held by menopausal participants themselves, their colleagues and their superiors were identified as crucial in determining menopausal experiences. Likewise, the ability to openly discuss menopause was also identified as an important factor. The NHS culture, gender dynamics and an adopted superhero mentality-where doctors feel compelled to prioritise work over personal well-being-further impacted under the umbrella of Organisational culture. Personal autonomy at work was considered important in improving menopausal experiences at work for doctors. The superhero mentality, lack of organisational support and a lack of open discussion were identified as novel themes not found in current literature, particularly in the healthcare context. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that doctors' factors underpinning an IME in the workplace are comparable to other sectors. The potential benefits of an IME for doctors in the NHS are considerable. NHS leaders can address these challenges by using pre-existing training materials and resources for their employees if menopausal doctors are to feel supported and retained.