EQIP\u27s First Year: A Step Closer to Higher Quality in Surgical Education.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the first year of the Educational Quality Improvement Program (EQIP) DESIGN: The Educational Quality Improvement Program (EQIP) was formed by the Association of Program Directors in Surgery (APDS) in 2018 as a continuous educational quality improvement program. Over 18 months, thirteen discrete goals for the establishment of EQIP were refined and executed through a collaborative effort involving leaders in surgical education. Alpha and beta pilots were conducted to refine the data queries and collection processes. A highly-secure, doubly-deidentified database was created for the ingestion of resident and program data. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 36 surgical training programs with 1264 trainees and 1500 faculty members were included in the dataset. 51,516 ERAS applications to programs were also included. Uni- and multi-variable analysis was then conducted. RESULTS: EQIP was successfully deployed within the timeline described in 2020. Data from the ACGME, ABS, and ERAS were merged with manually entered data by programs and successfully ingested into the EQIP database. Interactive dashboards have been constructed for use by programs to compare to the national cohort. Risk-adjusted multivariable analysis suggests that increased time in a technical skills lab was associated with increased success on the ABS\u27s Qualifying Examination, alone. Increased time in a technical skills lab and the presence of a formal teaching curriculum were associated with increased success on both the ABS\u27s Qualifying and Certifying Examination. Program type may be of some consequence in predicting success on the Qualifying Examination. CONCLUSIONS: The APDS has proved the concept that a highly secure database for the purpose of continuous risk-adjusted quality improvement in surgical education can be successfully deployed. EQIP will continue to improve and hopes to include an increasing number of programs as the barriers to participation are overcome

Ad astra per aspera (Through Hardships to the Stars): Lessons Learned from the First National Virtual APDS Meeting, 2020

This article is made available for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.Objective After COVID-19 rendered in-person meetings for national societies impossible in the spring of 2020, the leadership of the Association of Program Directors in Surgery (APDS) innovated via a virtual format in order to hold its national meeting. Design APDS leadership pre-emptively considered factors that would be important to attendees including cost, value, time, professional commitments, education, sharing of relevant and current information, and networking. Setting The meeting was conducted using a variety of virtual formats including a web portal for entry, pre-ecorded poster and oral presentations on the APDS website, interactive panels via a web conferencing platform, and livestreaming. Participants There were 298 registrants for the national meeting of the APDS, and 59 participants in the New Program Directors Workshop. The registrants and participants comprised medical students, residents, associate program directors, program directors, and others involved in surgical education nationally. Results There was no significant difference detected for high levels of participant satisfaction between 2019 and 2020 for the following items: overall program rating, topics and content meeting stated objectives, relevant content to educational needs, educational format conducive to learning, and agreement that the program will improve competence, performance, communication skills, patient outcomes, or processes of care/healthcare system performance. Conclusions A virtual format for a national society meeting can provide education, engagement, and community, and the lessons learned by the APDS in the process can be used by other societies for utilization and further improvement

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

The APDS General Surgery Education Quality Improvement Program (EQIP).

BACKGROUND: Although the ACGME has called for outcomes-based evaluation of residency programs, few metrics or benchmarks exist connecting educational processes with resident educational outcomes. To address this deficiency, a national Education Quality Improvement Program (EQIP) for General Surgery training is proposed. METHODS: We describe the initial efforts to create this platform. In addition, a national survey was administered to 330 Program Directors to assess their interest in and concerns about a continuous educational quality improvement project. RESULTS: We demonstrate that through a collaborative process and the support of the Association of Program Directors in Surgery (APDS), we were able to develop the groundwork for a national surgical educational improvement project, now called EQIP. The survey response rate was 45.8% (152 of 332 programs) representing a mix of university (55.3%), university-affiliated (18.4%), independent (24.3%), and military (2.0%) programs. Most respondents (66.2%) had not previously heard of EQIP. Most respondents (69.7%) believe that educational outcomes can be measured. The majority of respondents indicated they believed EQIP could be successful (57%). Only 2.3% thought EQIP would not be successful. Almost all programs (98.7%) expressed a willingness to participate, although 19.1% did not believe that they had adequate resources to participate. CONCLUSION: The APDS EQIP platform holds promise as a useful and achievable method to obtain educational outcomes data. These data can be used as a basis for continuous surgical educational quality improvement. General Surgery Program Directors have expressed enthusiasm for EQIP and are willing to participate in the program examining outcomes of General Surgery training programs, with an ultimate goal of improving overall residency training

Underrepresented minorities are underrepresented among general surgery applicants selected to interview.

OBJECTIVE: Diversity is an ill-defined entity in general surgery training. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education recently proposed new common program requirements including verbiage requiring diversity in residency. Recruiting for diversity can be challenging within the constraints of geographic preference, type of program, and applicant qualifications. In addition, the Match process adds further uncertainty. We sought to study the self-identified racial/ethnic distribution of general surgery applicants to better ascertain the characteristics of underrepresented minorities (URM) within the general surgery applicant pool. DESIGN: Program-specific data from the Electronic Residency Application Service was collated for the 2018 medical student application cycle. Data were abstracted for all participating programs\u27 applicants and those selected to interview. Applicants who did not enter a self-identified race/ethnicity were excluded from analysis. URM were defined as those identifying as Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino/of Spanish origin, American Indian/Alaskan Native, or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander-Samoan. Appropriate statistical analyses were accomplished. SETTING: Ten general surgery residency programs-5 independent programs and 5 university programs. PARTICIPANTS: Residency applicants to the participating general surgery residency programs. RESULTS: Ten surgery residency programs received 10,312 applications from 3192 unique applicants. Seven hundred and seventy-eight applications did not include a self-identified race/ethnicity and were excluded from analysis. The racial/ethnic makeup of applicants in this study cohort was similar to that from 2017 to 2018 Electronic Residency Application Service data of 4262 total applicants to categorical general surgery. Programs received a median of 1085 (range: 485-1264) applications each and altogether selected 617 unique applicants for interviews. Overall, 2148 applicants graduated from US medical schools, and of those, 595 (28%) were offered interviews. The mean age of applicants was 28.8 ± 3.8 years and 1316 (41%) were female. Hispanic/Latino/of Spanish origin, Black, and American Indian/Alaskan Native/Hawaiian/Pacific Islander-Samoan applicants constituted 12%, 8%, and 1% of total applicants, but only 8%, 6%, and 1% of those selected for interview. Overall, 29% of applicants had United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 scores ≤220; 37 (6%) of those selected for interviews had a USMLE Step 1 score of ≤220. A higher proportion of URM applicants had USMLE scores ≤220 compared to White and Asian applicants. Non-white self-identification was a significant independent predictor of a lower likelihood of interview selection. Female gender, USMLE Step 1 score \u3e220, and graduating from a US medical school were associated with an increased likelihood of being selected to interview. CONCLUSIONS: URM applicants represented a disproportionately smaller percentage of applicants selected for interview. USMLE Step 1 scores were lower among the URM applicants. Training programs that use discreet USMLE cutoffs are likely excluding URM at a higher rate than their non-URM applicants. Attempts to recruit racially/ethnically diverse trainees should include program-level analysis to determine disparities and a focused strategy to interview applicants who might be overlooked by conventional screening tools