Burnout and patient safety perceptions among surgeons in the United Kingdom during the early phases of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A two-wave survey

Background Surgeons in the UK report high burnout levels. Burnout has been found to be associated with adverse patient outcomes but there are few studies that have examined this association in surgeons and even fewer which have examined this relationship over time. Purpose The main aim was to examine the relationships between surgeon burnout and surgeons’ perceptions of patient safety cross-sectionally and longitudinally. The secondary aim was to test whether surgeons’ burnout levels varied over the first six months of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Methods This paper reports data from a two-wave survey (first wave from 5 May and 30 June 2020, the second wave 5 January to 30 February 2021). The dataset was divided into a longitudinal group (for surgeons who responded at both the time points) and two cross-sectional groups (for surgeons who responded at a one-time point, but not the other). Results The first key finding was that burnout was associated with patient safety outcomes measured at the same time point (Group 1 = 108, r = 0.309, p < 0.05 and Group 2 = 84, r = 0.238, p < 0.05). Second, burnout predicted poor patients’ safety perceptions over time, and poor patient safety predicted burnout over time (Group 3 = 39, p < 0.05). Third, burnout increased between the first and second surveys (t = -4.034, p < 0.05). Conclusion Burnout in surgeons may have serious implications for patient safety. Interventions to support surgeons should be prioritised, and healthcare organisations, surgeons and psychological specialists should collaborate on their development

Perceptions About the Present and Future of Surgical Simulation: A National Study of Mixed Qualitative and Quantitative Methodology.

Objectives: Assess expert opinion on the current and future role of simulation in surgical education. Design: Expert opinion was sought through an externally validated questionnaire that was disseminated electronically. Participants: Heads of Schools of Surgery (HoS) (and deputies) and Training Program Directors (TPD) (and deputies). Results: Simulation was considered a good training tool (HoS: 15/15, TPD: 21/21). The concept that simulation is useful mostly to novices and for basic skills acquisition was rejected (HoS: 15/15, TPDs: 21/21; HoS: 13/15, TPDs: 18/21). Further, simulation is considered suitable for teaching nontechnical skills (HoS: 13/15, TPDs: 20/21) and re-enacting stressful situations (HoS: 14/15, TPDs: 15/21). Most respondents also felt that education centers should be formally accredited (HoS: 12/15, TPDs: 16/21) and that consultant mentors should be appointed by every trust (HoS: 12/15, TPDs: 19/21). In contrast, there were mixed views on its use for trainee assessment (HoS: 6/15, TPDs: 14/21) and whether it should be compulsory (HoS: 8/15, TPDs: 11/21). Conclusion: The use of simulation for the acquirement of both technical and nontechnical skills is strongly supported while views on other applications (e.g., assessment) are conflicting. Further, the need for center accreditation and supervised, consultant-led teaching is highlighted

Patient-specific mental rehearsal with three-dimensional models before low anterior resection: randomized clinical trial

Background It was hypothesized that preparing for a surgical procedure, taking into account individual patient characteristics, may facilitate the procedure and improve surgical quality. The aim of this study was to compare different case-specific, preoperative mental rehearsal methods before minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery. Methods In this RCT, patients were allocated in a 1 : 1 : 1 : 1 ratio to four groups: systematic mental rehearsal (SMR) using MRI scans; SMR and three-dimensional (3D) virtual models; SMR and synthetic 3D printed models; and routine practice (control group). Surgeons operating on all but the control group underwent mental rehearsal with the visual aids, including axial MRI scans of the pelvis, interactive 3D virtual models reconstructed from axial MRIs, and synthetic models, manufactured by 3D printing. Operations were video-recorded and assessed by two experts blinded to allocation using two validated scores, the Competency Assessment Tool (CAT) and Objective Clinical Human Reliability Analysis (OCHRA). The primary outcome of the study was surgical performance, measured by the CAT. Results Forty-nine patients were randomized and allocated to the four groups. There were 12 participants in each of the control, MRI and SMR, and virtual and SMR groups, whereas the SMR using physical models and simulation group included 13. No difference was observed between groups in median CAT scores (control 30.50, MRI 34.25, virtual 31.75, physical 34.00; P = 0.748, partial η2 0.200, pη2 =0.052–0.088). Time spent not performing dissection was significantly shorter for the SMR with MRI group than for the control (57.5 versus 42 respectively; P < 0.001, pη2 =0.212). Conclusion Mental rehearsal did not affect CAT and OCHRA scores of consultant surgeons. Reference number: ISRCTN 75603704 (https://www.isrctn.com)

PRESS survey: PREvention of surgical site infection—a global pan-specialty survey of practice protocol

BackgroundSurgical site infections (SSI) complicate up to 40% of surgical procedures, leading to increased patient morbidity and mortality. Previous research identified disparities in SSI prevention guidelines and clinical practices across different institutions. The study aims to identify variations in SSI prevention practices within and between specialties and financial systems and provide a representation of existing SSI preventative measures to help improve the standardization of SSI prevention practices.MethodsThis collaborative cross-sectional survey will be aimed at pan-surgical specialties internationally. The study has been designed and will be reported in line with the CROSS and CHERRIES standards. An international study steering committee will design and internally validate the survey in multiple consensus-based rounds. This will be based on SSI prevention measures outlined in the CDC (2017), WHO (2018), NICE (2019), Wounds UK (2020) and the International Surgical Wound Complications Advisory Panel (ISWCAP) guidelines. The questionnaire will include demographics, SSI surveillance, preoperative, peri-operative and postoperative SSI prevention. Data will be collected on participants' surgical specialty, operative grade, of practice and financial healthcare system of practice. The online survey will be designed and disseminated using Qualtrics XM Platform™ through national and international surgical colleges and societies, in addition to social media and snowballing. Data collection will be open for 3 months with reminders, and raking will be used to ascertain the sample. Responses will be analyzed, and the chi-square test used to evaluate the impact of SSI prevention variables on responses.DiscussionCurrent SSI prevention practice in UK Vascular surgery varies considerably, with little consensus on many measures. Given the inconsistency in guidelines on how to prevent SSIs, there is a need for standardization. This survey will investigate the disparity in SSI preventative measures between different surgical fields and countries

Innovation in gastrointestinal surgery: the evolution of minimally invasive surgery—a narrative review

Background Minimally invasive (MI) surgery has revolutionised surgery, becoming the standard of care in many countries around the globe. Observed benefits over traditional open surgery include reduced pain, shorter hospital stay, and decreased recovery time. Gastrointestinal surgery in particular was an early adaptor to both laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Within this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the evolution of minimally invasive gastrointestinal surgery and a critical outlook on the evidence surrounding its effectiveness and safety. Methods A literature review was conducted to identify relevant articles for the topic of this review. The literature search was performed using Medical Subject Heading terms on PubMed. The methodology for evidence synthesis was in line with the four steps for narrative reviews outlined in current literature. The key words used were minimally invasive, robotic, laparoscopic colorectal, colon, rectal surgery. Conclusion The introduction of minimally surgery has revolutionised patient care. Despite the evidence supporting this technique in gastrointestinal surgery, several controversies remain. Here we discuss some of them; the lack of high level evidence regarding the oncological outcomes of TaTME and lack of supporting evidence for robotic colorectalrectal surgery and upper GI surgery. These controversies open pathways for future research opportunities with RCTs focusing on comparing robotic to laparoscopic with different primary outcomes including ergonomics and surgeon comfort