3 research outputs found
Burnout among surgeons before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: an international survey
Background: SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has had many significant impacts within the surgical realm, and surgeons have been obligated to reconsider almost every aspect of daily clinical practice. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study reported in compliance with the CHERRIES guidelines and conducted through an online platform from June 14th to July 15th, 2020. The primary outcome was the burden of burnout during the pandemic indicated by the validated Shirom-Melamed Burnout Measure. Results: Nine hundred fifty-four surgeons completed the survey. The median length of practice was 10 years; 78.2% included were male with a median age of 37 years old, 39.5% were consultants, 68.9% were general surgeons, and 55.7% were affiliated with an academic institution. Overall, there was a significant increase in the mean burnout score during the pandemic; longer years of practice and older age were significantly associated with less burnout. There were significant reductions in the median number of outpatient visits, operated cases, on-call hours, emergency visits, and research work, so, 48.2% of respondents felt that the training resources were insufficient. The majority (81.3%) of respondents reported that their hospitals were included in the management of COVID-19, 66.5% felt their roles had been minimized; 41% were asked to assist in non-surgical medical practices, and 37.6% of respondents were included in COVID-19 management. Conclusions: There was a significant burnout among trainees. Almost all aspects of clinical and research activities were affected with a significant reduction in the volume of research, outpatient clinic visits, surgical procedures, on-call hours, and emergency cases hindering the training. Trial registration: The study was registered on clicaltrials.gov "NCT04433286" on 16/06/2020
Comparison of diagnoses of early-onset sepsis associated with use of Sepsis Risk Calculator versus NICE CG149: a prospective, population-wide cohort study in London, UK, 2020ā2021
Objective We sought to compare the incidence of early-onset sepsis (EOS) in infants ā„34 weeksā gestation identified >24āhours after birth, in hospitals using the Kaiser Permanente Sepsis Risk Calculator (SRC) with hospitals using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance.Design and setting Prospective observational population-wide cohort study involving all 26 hospitals with neonatal units colocated with maternity services across London (10 using SRC, 16 using NICE).Participants All live births ā„34 weeksā gestation between September 2020 and August 2021.Outcome measures EOS was defined as isolation of a bacterial pathogen in the blood or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) culture from birth to 7 days of age. We evaluated the incidence of EOS identified by culture obtained >24āhours to 7 days after birth. We also evaluated the rate empiric antibiotics were commenced >24āhours to 7 days after birth, for a duration of ā„5ādays, with negative blood or CSF cultures.Results Of 99ā683 live births, 42ā952 (43%) were born in SRC hospitals and 56ā731 (57%) in NICE hospitals. The overall incidence of EOS (<72āhours) was 0.64/1000 live births. The incidence of EOS identified >24āhours was 2.3/100 000 (n=1) for SRC vs 7.1/100 000 (n=4) for NICE (OR 0.5, 95%āCI (0.1 to 2.7)). This corresponded to (1/20) 5% (SRC) vs (4/45) 8.9% (NICE) of EOS cases (Ļ=0.3, p=0.59). Empiric antibiotics were commenced >24āhours to 7 days after birth in 4.4/1000 (n=187) for SRC vs 2.9/1000 (n=158) for NICE (OR 1.5, 95%āCI (1.2 to 1.9)). 3111 (7%) infants received antibiotics in the first 24 hours in SRC hospitals vs 8428 (15%) in NICE hospitals.Conclusion There was no significant difference in the incidence of EOS identified >24āhours after birth between SRC and NICE hospitals. SRC use was associated with 50% fewer infants receiving antibiotics in the first 24 hours of life