Management of acute appendicitis in pregnancy (MAMA): protocol for a multicentre observational study

Introduction Acute appendicitis is the most common emergency general surgical condition in pregnancy, affecting around 1 in 1000 pregnancies. Reaching a diagnosis is more challenging in this group because of altered clinical presentations and the limitations of diagnostic tools in pregnancy. There is limited guidance from national bodies in the UK on the management of this condition. This study aims to describe current diagnostic and treatment practices for acute appendicitis in pregnancy in the UK, and associated outcomes, to identify variations in practice and areas for improvement. Methods and analysis This is a UK-wide observational study. Hospitals providing an emergency general surgical service will be eligible to participate. The study consists of two components: (1) a site resource-profile questionnaire to assess the setup of services to care for the pregnant patient requiring emergency non-obstetric abdominal surgery to be completed by a senior collaborator at each participating site, and (2) a retrospective study of patients diagnosed with appendicitis or who had an appendicectomy for suspected appendicitis during a ten-year study period (2013–2023). Data will be collected on diagnostics, radiological findings, management approach and surgical and obstetric outcomes. The main measure of interest is the management approaches (operative versus non-operative; laparoscopic versus open surgery) and their association with selected outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression analyses will be conducted to identify factors which might predict the management strategy and outcomes. Ethics and dissemination The protocol for this service evaluation study has been reviewed by the University of Sheffield Research Ethics Committee. The study findings will be discussed in a multistakeholder workshop consisting of general surgeons, obstetricians and gynaecologists, radiologists, anaesthetists and patient representatives with a view to making recommendations for quality improvement work and further research. Key findings and recommendations will be disseminated through specialist societies

The classification of Information and Communication Technology Investment in Financial Accounting

Financial accounting is well known in its responsibility for book keeping the organisational expenditure and the preparation of the financial statements. ICT investment has become important to investors and not reporting these investments on financial statement leads to misevaluation of the organisation market value. Moreover, the misclassification of ICT investment has been indicated, yet not investigated in the past researches. The unreported ICT investment and the misclassification of ICT investment could affect the measurement of ICT investment at firm level. By analysing the content of the financial statement for 86 firms listing in Australian Stock Exchange, this study explains how ICT investments were being classified with the other investment in financial reports from 2006 to 2010. Differentiating between ICT asset and expense is an initial step into the understanding about the classification of ICT investment in financial accounting. The accounting standards requires the capitalisation conditions including future economic benefit, controllability, identifiability, existence, and reliability measurement to be justified for the expenditure before it can be capitalised as asset. The study use fuzzy set qualitative and comparative analysis (fsQCA) to analyse the information collected from the experts in the accounting fields. Base on fsQCA analysis, the study is able to shows that the factors considered by the organisation to differentiate ICT asset from ICT expense is beyond the requirement in definition of asset stated in the International Accounting Standards and the Australian Accounting Standards

Surgical site infections after emergency hernia repair: substudy from the Management of Acutely Symptomatic Hernia (MASH) study

Introduction Acutely symptomatic abdominal wall and groin hernias (ASH) are a common acute surgical presentation. There are limited data to guide decisions related to surgical repair technique and use of antibiotics, which can be driven by increased risk of surgical site infection (SSI) in this group. This study aims to report rates of SSI following ASH repair and explore the use of patient-reported outcome measure reporting in this setting. Methods An 18-week, UK-based, multicentre prospective cohort study (NCT04197271) recruited adults with ASH. This study reports operatively managed patients. Data on patient characteristics, inpatient management, quality of life, complications, and wound healing (Bluebelle score) were collected. Descriptive analyses were performed to estimate event rates of SSI and regression analysis explored the relationship between Bluebelle scores and SSI. The 30 and 90-day follow-up visits assessed complications and quality of life. Results The MASH study recruited 273 patients, of whom 218 were eligible for this study, 87.2 per cent who underwent open repair. Mesh was used in 123 patients (50.8 per cent). Pre- and postoperative antibiotics were given in 163 (67.4 per cent) and 28 (11.5 per cent) patients respectively. There were 26 reported SSIs (11.9 per cent). Increased BMI, incisional, femoral, and umbilical hernia were associated with higher rates of SSI (P = 0.006). In 238 patients, there was a difference in healthy utility values at 90 days between patients with and without SSI (P = 0.025). Also, when analysing 191 patients with Bluebelle scores, those who developed an SSI had higher Bluebelle values (P < 0.001). Conclusion SSI is frequent in repair of acutely symptomatic hernia and correlates with BMI and site of hernia

Management of Acutely Symptomatic Hernia (MASH) study

Background Acutely symptomatic abdominal wall and groin hernias are a common reason for acute surgical hospital admissions. There are limited data to guide the treatment of these patients. This study aimed to assess outcomes of emergency hernia surgery and identify common management strategies, to improve care for these high-risk patients. Methods A 20-week, national multicentre, collaborative, prospective cohort study (NCT04197271) recruited adults with acutely symptomatic abdominal wall and groin hernias across the UK. Data on patient characteristics, inpatient management, quality of life, complications, and wound healing were collected. Follow-up telephone calls at 30 and 90 days were used to assessed complications and quality of life. Descriptive analyses were undertaken to describe the population and outcomes. Results Twenty-three hospitals recruited 272 eligible patients. Inguinal (37.8 per cent) and umbilical (37.1 per cent) hernias were the most common. Some 13.9 per cent were awaiting elective surgery and 12.8 per cent had previously declined intervention. CT was performed in 47.1 per cent and 81.3 per cent underwent surgical management. Open repairs were carried out in 93.5 per cent, and 92.5 per cent of these were performed under general anaesthesia. Four of 13 laparoscopic procedures were converted to open surgery. Mesh was used in 55.1 per cent of repairs, typically synthetic non-absorbable (87.4 per cent). Complications were infrequent; surgical-site infection (9.4 per cent), delirium (3.2 per cent), and pneumonia (2.3 per cent) were the most common. The 90-day mortality rate was 4.9 per cent. Immediate surgical management was associated with a significant improvement in quality of life at 30 days (median score 0.73–0.82). Conclusion There is variation in the investigation, management, and surgical technique used to treat acutely symptomatic abdominal wall and groin hernias in the UK. The optimal management strategy for specific acute presentations remains to be established. Presented to the Association of Surgeons in Training Conference, Birmingham, UK, March 2021, the Association of Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland Congress, May 2021, the World Society of Emergency Surgery, Edinburgh, UK, September 2021, and the European Hernia Society Congress, Copenhagen, Denmark, October 2021

Body mass index and complications following major gastrointestinal surgery: a prospective, international cohort study and meta‐analysis

Aim Previous studies reported conflicting evidence on the effects of obesity on outcomes after gastrointestinal surgery. The aims of this study were to explore the relationship of obesity with major postoperative complications in an international cohort and to present a meta-analysis of all available prospective data.Methods This prospective, multicentre study included adults undergoing both elective and emergency gastrointestinal resection, reversal of stoma or formation of stoma. The primary end-point was 30-day major complications (Clavien-Dindo Grades III-V). A systematic search was undertaken for studies assessing the relationship between obesity and major complications after gastrointestinal surgery. Individual patient meta-analysis was used to analyse pooled results.Results This study included 2519 patients across 127 centres, of whom 560 (22.2%) were obese. Unadjusted major complication rates were lower in obese vs normal weight patients (13.0% vs 16.2%, respectively), but this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.863) on multivariate analysis for patients having surgery for either malignant or benign conditions. Individual patient meta-analysis demonstrated that obese patients undergoing surgery for malignancy were at increased risk of major complications (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.49-2.96, P &lt; 0.001), whereas obese patients undergoing surgery for benign indications were at decreased risk (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.75, P &lt; 0.001) compared to normal weight patients.Conclusions In our international data, obesity was not found to be associated with major complications following gastrointestinal surgery. Meta-analysis of available prospective data made a novel finding of obesity being associated with different outcomes depending on whether patients were undergoing surgery for benign or malignant disease

Body mass index and complications following major gastrointestinal surgery: a prospective, international cohort study and meta-analysis.

AIM: Previous studies reported conflicting evidence on the effects of obesity on outcomes after gastrointestinal surgery. The aims of this study were to explore the relationship of obesity with major postoperative complications in an international cohort and to present a meta-analysis of all available prospective data. METHODS: This prospective, multicentre study included adults undergoing both elective and emergency gastrointestinal resection, reversal of stoma or formation of stoma. The primary end-point was 30-day major complications (Clavien-Dindo Grades III-V). A systematic search was undertaken for studies assessing the relationship between obesity and major complications after gastrointestinal surgery. Individual patient meta-analysis was used to analyse pooled results. RESULTS: This study included 2519 patients across 127 centres, of whom 560 (22.2%) were obese. Unadjusted major complication rates were lower in obese vs normal weight patients (13.0% vs 16.2%, respectively), but this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.863) on multivariate analysis for patients having surgery for either malignant or benign conditions. Individual patient meta-analysis demonstrated that obese patients undergoing surgery for malignancy were at increased risk of major complications (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.49-2.96, P < 0.001), whereas obese patients undergoing surgery for benign indications were at decreased risk (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.75, P < 0.001) compared to normal weight patients. CONCLUSIONS: In our international data, obesity was not found to be associated with major complications following gastrointestinal surgery. Meta-analysis of available prospective data made a novel finding of obesity being associated with different outcomes depending on whether patients were undergoing surgery for benign or malignant disease