Documenting the Recovery of Vascular Services in European Centres Following the Initial COVID-19 Pandemic Peak: Results from a Multicentre Collaborative Study

Objective: To document the recovery of vascular services in Europe following the first COVID-19 pandemic peak. Methods: An online structured vascular service survey with repeated data entry between 23 March and 9 August 2020 was carried out. Unit level data were collected using repeated questionnaires addressing modifications to vascular services during the first peak (March – May 2020, “period 1”), and then again between May and June (“period 2”) and June and July 2020 (“period 3”). The duration of each period was similar. From 2 June, as reductions in cases began to be reported, centres were first asked if they were in a region still affected by rising cases, or if they had passed the peak of the first wave. These centres were asked additional questions about adaptations made to their standard pathways to permit elective surgery to resume. Results: The impact of the pandemic continued to be felt well after countries’ first peak was thought to have passed in 2020. Aneurysm screening had not returned to normal in 21.7% of centres. Carotid surgery was still offered on a case by case basis in 33.8% of centres, and only 52.9% of centres had returned to their normal aneurysm threshold for surgery. Half of centres (49.4%) believed their management of lower limb ischaemia continued to be negatively affected by the pandemic. Reduced operating theatre capacity continued in 45.5% of centres. Twenty per cent of responding centres documented a backlog of at least 20 aortic repairs. At least one negative swab and 14 days of isolation were the most common strategies used for permitting safe elective surgery to recommence. Conclusion: Centres reported a broad return of services approaching pre-pandemic “normal” by July 2020. Many introduced protocols to manage peri-operative COVID-19 risk. Backlogs in cases were reported for all major vascular surgeries

Burnout prevalence and correlates amongst Colombian dental students: The STRESSCODE study

Introduction: Accumulating evidence amongst dental students indicates an alarming prevalence of stress, which can precipitate the development of burnout - a state of mental or physical exhaustion and disengagement. Understanding individual and educational correlates of burnout is necessary for its prevention. The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of burnout amongst a large sample of Colombian dental undergraduates and investigate its psychosocial and educational correlates. Materials and methods: Survey data collected from 5647 students participating in the Stress in Colombian Dental Education study were used for this analysis. Burnout was measured using the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Student Survey (MBI-SS). Covariates included participants' socio-demographic characteristics and perceived stress, as well as educational environment factors. Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate methods based on multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression modelling were used for data analysis. Results: Seven per cent of the students surveyed met the criteria for burnout. The prevalence of burnout was higher amongst upper classes, older and married students, those who reported not having passed all required courses and not having dentistry as their first career choice, as well as students in public institutions and those with large class sizes. Moreover, students' perceived stress in the domains of workload and self-efficacy was significantly and positively associated with burnout. Conclusions: Both personal and educational environment characteristics were found to be associated with burnout. Irrespective of these factors, students' perceived stress with regard to workload and self-efficacy was a strong influence on burnout and its alleviation may be a promising avenue to prevent psychological morbidity. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S

BJS commission on surgery and perioperative care post-COVID-19

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic by the WHO on 11 March 2020 and global surgical practice was compromised. This Commission aimed to document and reflect on the changes seen in the surgical environment during the pandemic, by reviewing colleagues experiences and published evidence. Methods: In late 2020, BJS contacted colleagues across the global surgical community and asked them to describe how severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had affected their practice. In addition to this, the Commission undertook a literature review on the impact of COVID-19 on surgery and perioperative care. A thematic analysis was performed to identify the issues most frequently encountered by the correspondents, as well as the solutions and ideas suggested to address them. Results: BJS received communications for this Commission from leading clinicians and academics across a variety of surgical specialties in every inhabited continent. The responses from all over the world provided insights into multiple facets of surgical practice from a governmental level to individual clinical practice and training. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has uncovered a variety of problems in healthcare systems, including negative impacts on surgical practice. Global surgical multidisciplinary teams are working collaboratively to address research questions about the future of surgery in the post-COVID-19 era. The COVID-19 pandemic is severely damaging surgical training. The establishment of a multidisciplinary ethics committee should be encouraged at all surgical oncology centres. Innovative leadership and collaboration is vital in the post-COVID-19 era

BJS commission on surgery and perioperative care post-COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic by the WHO on 11 March 2020 and global surgical practice was compromised. This Commission aimed to document and reflect on the changes seen in the surgical environment during the pandemic, by reviewing colleagues' experiences and published evidence