The Impact of COVID-19 on Surgical Training: the Past, the Present and the Future

The COVID-19 pandemic and infection control measures had an unavoidable impact on surgical services. During the first wave of the pandemic, elective surgery, endoscopy, and ‘face-to-face’ clinics were discontinued after recommendations from professional bodies. In addition, training courses, examinations, conferences, and training rotations were postponed or cancelled. Inadvertently, infection control and prevention measures, both within and outside hospitals, have caused a significant negative impact on training. At the same time, they have given space to new technologies, like telemedicine and platforms for webinars, to blossom. While the recovery phase is well underway in some parts of the world, most surgical services are not operating at full capacity. Unfortunately, some countries are still battling a second or third wave of the pandemic with severely negative consequences on surgical services. Several studies have looked into the impact of COVID-19 on surgical training. Here, an objective overview of studies from different parts of the world is presented. Also, evidence-based solutions are suggested for future surgical training interventions

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

Telemedicine for sustainable postoperative follow-up: a prospective pilot study evaluating the hybrid life-cycle assessment approach to carbon footprint analysis

IntroductionSurgical site infections (SSI) are the most common healthcare-associated infections; however, access to healthcare services, lack of patient awareness of signs, and inadequate wound surveillance can limit timely diagnosis. Telemedicine as a method for remote postoperative follow-up has been shown to improve healthcare efficiency without compromising clinical outcomes. Furthermore, telemedicine would reduce the carbon footprint of the National Health Service (NHS) through minimising patient travel, a significant contributor of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions. Adopting innovative approaches, such as telemedicine, could aid in the NHS Net-Zero target by 2045. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive analysis of the feasibility and sustainability of telemedicine postoperative follow-up for remote diagnosis of SSI.MethodsPatients who underwent a lower limb vascular procedure were reviewed remotely at 30 days following the surgery, with a combined outcome measure (photographs and Bluebelle Wound Healing Questionnaire). A hybrid life-cycle assessment approach to carbon footprint analysis was used. The kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent (kgCO2e) associated with remote methods were mapped prospectively. A simple outpatient clinic review, i.e., no further investigations or management required, was modelled for comparison. The Department of Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) conversion factors plus healthcare specific sources were used to ascertain kgCO2e. Patient postcodes were applied to conversion factors based upon mode of travel to calculate kgCO2e for patient travel. Total and median (interquartile range) carbon emissions saved were presented for both patients with and without SSI.ResultsAltogether 31 patients (M:F 2.4, ±11.7 years) were included. The median return distance for patient travel was 42.5 (7.2–58.7) km. Median reduction in emissions using remote follow-up was 41.2 (24.5–80.3) kgCO2e per patient (P < 0.001). The carbon offsetting value of remote follow-up is planting one tree for every 6.9 patients. Total carbon footprint of face-to-face follow-up was 2,895.3 kgCO2e, compared with 1,301.3 kgCO2e when using a remote-first approach (P < 0.001). Carbon emissions due to participants without SSI were 700.2 kgCO2e by the clinical method and 28.8 kgCO2e from the remote follow-up.DiscussionThis model shows that the hybrid life-cycle assessment approach is achievable and reproducible. Implementation of an asynchronous digital follow-up model is effective in substantially reducing the carbon footprint of a tertiary vascular surgical centre. Further work is needed to corroborate these findings on a larger scale, quantify the impact of telemedicine on patient's quality of life, and incorporate kgCO2e into the cost analysis of potential SSI monitoring strategies

Improving weekend handover in a teaching hospital elective general surgery department

BackgroundEffective documentation and transfer of clinical information are vital for the continuity of care, patient safety, and maintaining medico-legal records, as outlined by the Royal College of Surgeons “Safe Handover: Guidance from the Working Time Directive working party”. Our elective surgery weekend team cross-covers both Colorectal and Upper Gastrointestinal surgical specialties across multiple wards, which poses a significant challenge. The aim of this study was to improve the documentation of patients' weekend plans through the introduction of a weekend handover proforma.MethodWe reviewed the weekend plans of 199 patients overall. 41 records were initially reviewed over a 2-week period. The surgical multidisciplinary team was then surveyed to establish the need for an improved weekend handover. Following this, a weekend handover proforma was introduced as part of the Friday ward round and education on the expectations were provided at a local Surgery Clinical Governance meeting. The documentation of the weekend plan was reviewed for 158 patients over a 6-week period and a post-intervention survey was disseminated.ResultsThe preliminary survey highlighted concerns for delayed discharges and patient safety over the weekend, with 88.2% of respondents agreeing a weekend handover proforma would be beneficial. The initial data confirmed inadequate documentation of diagnosis (19.5%), operation/procedure (28.1%), and weekend plans for blood tests (19.5%), discharge planning (2.4%), diet (46.3%), antibiotics (19.5%), intravenous (IV) fluids (22.0%), mobility (19.5%) and drain/wound care (37.5%). After education and implementing a weekend handover proforma, these results increased for documentation of diagnosis (61.2%), operation/procedure (83.2%), blood tests (59.7%), and discharge planning (85.8%). However, there was little improvement in diet (53.0%) and no improvement in the weekend plans for antibiotics (14.2%), IV fluids (17.2%), mobility (14.9%) and drain/wound care (20.2%). The post-intervention survey showed an improvement across all areas, notably continuity of care and patient safety, with 95.5% of individuals finding the weekend handover proforma aided in patient care over the weekend.ConclusionEducation of the ward team and implementation of a weekend handover proforma resulted in a marked improvement in the documentation of patients' weekend plans, which is essential to ensure the continuation of safe and effective patient care

Faecal incontinence—a comprehensive review

IntroductionFaecal incontinence (FI) is a distressing and often stigmatizing condition characterised as the recurrent involuntary passage of liquid or solid faeces. The reported prevalence of FI exhibits considerable variation, ranging from 7 to 15% in the general population, with higher rates reported among older adults and women. This review explores the pathophysiology mechanisms, the diagnostic modalities and the efficiency of treatment options up to date.MethodsA review of the literature was conducted to identify the pathophysiological pathways, investigation and treatment modalities.Result and discussionThis review provides an in-depth exploration of the intricate physiological processes that maintain continence in humans. It then guides the reader through a detailed examination of diagnostic procedures and a thorough analysis of the available treatment choices, including their associated success rates. This review is an ideal resource for individuals with a general medical background and colorectal surgeons who lack specialized knowledge in pelvic floor disorders, as it offers a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms, diagnosis, and treatment of faecal incontinence (FI)

Time for change: compliance with RCS green theatre checklist?facilitators and barriers on the journey to net zero

Background: Climate change is an era-defining health concern, with healthcare related emissions paradoxically compounding negative impacts. The NHS produces 5% of the UK's carbon footprint, with operating theatres a recognised carbon hotspot. NHS England aims to become Net Zero by 2045. Consequently, UK Royal Colleges of Surgery have published guidance to foster an evidence-based sustainable transformation in surgical practice. Methods: A single-centre quality improvement project was undertaken, aiming to provide an overview of sustainable practice locally. The Intercollegiate “Green Theatre Checklist” was taken as an audit standard, focusing on “preparing for surgery” and “intraoperative equipment” subsections. Any general surgical procedure was eligible for inclusion. Usage of reusable textiles, non-sterile gloves, catheters, antibiotics, alcohol vs. water-based scrub techniques, skin sterilisation choices, and skin closure materials were recorded. Baseline data collection occurred over a 3 week period, followed by dissemination of results locally via clinical governance meetings and poster displays. A re-audit of practice was conducted using the same methodology and duration. Results: Datasets 1 (n = 23) and 2 (n = 23) included open (n = 22), laparoscopic (n = 24), elective (n = 22) and non-elective (n = 24) cases. Good practice was demonstrated in reusable textiles (trolley covers 96%, 78%, drapes 100%, 92%) however procurement issues reduced otherwise good reusable gown use in Dataset 2 in (90%, 46%). No unnecessary catheter use was identified, and loose skin preparations were used unanimously. Uptake of alcohol-based scrubbing techniques was low (15%, 17%) and unnecessary non-sterile glove use was observed in >30% of procedures. All laparoscopic ports and scissors were single use. Carbon footprints were 128.27 kgCO2e and 117.71 kgCO2e in datasets 1 and 2 respectively. Conclusion: This project evidences good practice alongside future local focus areas for improved sustainability. Adoption of hybrid laparoscopic instruments, avoiding unnecessary equipment opening, and standardising reusable materials could reduce carbon and environmental impact considerably. Successful implementation requires considered procurement practices, improved awareness and education, clear leadership, and a sustained cultural shift within the healthcare community. Collaboration among professional institutions and access to supporting evidence is crucial in driving engagement and empowering clinicians to make locally relevant changes a reality

The impact of the European Association of Endoscopic Surgery research grant scheme—a mixed qualitative quantitative methodology study protocol

BackgroundThe European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) is a surgical society who promotes the development and expansion of minimally invasive surgery to surgeons and surgical trainees. It does so through its activities in education, training, and research. The EAES research committee aims to promote the highest quality clinical research in endoscopic and minimally invasive surgery. They have provided grant funding since 2009 in education, surgery, and basic science. Despite the success and longevity of the scheme, the academic and non-academic impact of the research funding scheme has not been evaluated.AimsThe primary aim of this project is to assess the short, long term academic and real world impact of the EAES funding scheme. The secondary aims are to identify barriers and facilitators for achieving good impact.MethodsThis will be a mixed qualitative and quantitative study. Semi-structured interviews will be performed with previous grant recipients. The questions for the interviews will be selected after a consensus is achieved amongst the members of the steering committee of this project. The responses will be transcribed and thematic analysis will be applied. The results of the thematic analysis will be used to populate a questionnaire which will be disseminated to grant recipients. This study is kindly funded by the EAES.DiscussionThe first question this project is expected to answer is whether the EAES research funding scheme had a significant positive impact on research output, career progression but also non-academic output such as change in clinical guidelines, healthcare quality and cost-effectiveness improvement. This project however is also expected to identify facilitators and barriers to successful completion of projects and to achieving high impact. This will inform EAES and the rest of the surgical and academic communities as to how clinicians would like to be supported when conducting research. There should also be a positive and decisive change towards removing factors that hinder the timely and successful completion of projects

“Take-home” box trainers are an effective alternative to virtual reality simulators

Background: Practice on Virtual Reality simulators (VRS) have been shown to improve surgical performance. However, VRS are expensive and usually housed in surgical skills centres that may be inaccessible at times convenient for surgical trainees to practice. Conversely, box trainers are inexpensive and can be used anywhere at anytime. This study assesses “take-home” Box Trainers (BT) as an alternative to VRS. Methods: After baseline assessments (two simulated laparoscopic cholecystectomies, one on a VRS and one on a BT) 25 surgical trainees were randomised to two groups. Trainees were asked to practice 3 basic laparoscopic tasks for 6 weeks (BT group using a “take-home” box trainer; VR group using VRS in clinical skills centres). After the practice period all performed two LC, one on a VRS and one on a BT; (i.e. post-training assessment). VRS provided metrics (total time (TT), number of movements (NOM) instrument tip path length (PL)) and expert video assessment of cholecystectomy in a BT (GOALS score) were recorded. Performance during pre- and post-training assessment was compared. Results: The BT group showed a significant improvement for all VRS metrics (p=0.008) and the efficiency category of GOALS score (p=0.03). Only TT improved in the VRS group and none of the GOALS categories demonstrated a statistically significant improvement after training. Finally, the improvement in VRS metrics in the BT group was significantly greater than in the VR group (TT p=0.005, NOM p=0.042, PL p=0.031) although there were no differences in the GOALS scores between the groups. Conclusion: This study suggests that a basic “take-home” BTs is a suitable alternative to VRSs

Laparoscopic vs Open approach for transverse colon cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis of short and long term outcomes

Background: Transverse colon malignancies have been excluded from all randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic against open colectomies, potentially due to the advanced laparoscopic skills required for dissecting around the middle colic vessels and the associated morbidity. Concerns have been expressed that the laparospopic approach may compromise the oncological clearance in transverse colon cancer. This study aimed to comprehensively compare the laparoscopic (LPA) to the open (OPA) approach by performing a meta-analysis of long and short term outcomes. Methods: Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, Scopus and Web of Knowledge databases were interrogated. Selected studies were critically appraised and the short-term morbidity and long term oncological outcomes were meta-analyzed. Sensitivity analysis according to the quality of the study, type of procedure (laparoscopic vs laparoscopically assisted) and level of lymphadenectomy was performed. Statistical heterogeneity and publication bias were also investigated. Results: Eleven case control trials (1415 patients) were included in the study. There was no difference between the LPA and the OPA in overall survival [Hazard Ratio (HR)=0.83 (0.56, 1.22); P=0.34], disease free survival (p=0.20), local recurrence (p=0.81) or distant metastases (p=0.24). LPA was found to have longer operative time [Weighted mean difference (WMD)=45.00 (29.48, 60.52);P<0.00001] with earlier establishment of oral intake [WMD=-1.68 (-1.84, -1.53);P<0.00001] and shorter hospital stay [WMD =-2.94 (-4.27, -1.62);P=0.0001]. No difference was found in relation to anastomotic leakage (p=0.39), intra-abdominal abscess (p=0.25), lymph nodes harvested (p=0.17). Conclusions: LPA seems to be safe with equivalent oncological outcomes to OPA and better short term outcomes in selected patient populations. High quality Randomized control trials are required to further investigate the role of laparoscopy in transverse colon cancer

A Multispecialty Evaluation of Thiel Cadavers for Surgical Training

Background: Changes in UK legislation allow for surgical procedures to be performed on cadavers. The aim of this study was to assess Thiel cadavers as high-fidelity simulators and to examine their suitability for surgical training. Methods: Surgeons from various specialties were invited to attend a 1 day dissection workshop using Thiel cadavers. The surgeons completed a baseline questionnaire on cadaveric simulation. At the end of the workshop, they completed a similar questionnaire based on their experience with Thiel cadavers. Comparing the answers in the pre- and post-workshop questionnaires assessed whether using Thiel cadavers had changed the surgeons’ opinions of cadaveric simulation. Results: According to the 27 participants, simulation is important for surgical training and a full-procedure model is beneficial for all levels of training. Currently, there is dissatisfaction with existing models and a need for high-fidelity alternatives. After the workshop, surgeons concluded that Thiel cadavers are suitable for surgical simulation (p = 0.015). Thiel were found to be realistic (p < 0.001) to have reduced odour (p = 0.002) and be more cost-effective (p = 0.003). Ethical constraints were considered to be small. Conclusion: Thiel cadavers are suitable for training in most surgical specialties