Search

Background and aim The Nordic countries have similar health care systems and registries simplifying epidemiological research. Differences in treatment traditions can, however, hamper the possibility to assess results and to harmonize control arms in joint randomized trials. In the process to set up a Nordic multi-center randomized trial regarding use of nasogastric tube (NG-tube) decompression after esophagectomy, we aimed to investigate perioperative routines in 12 University Hospitals in Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland. Methods All Nordic University Hospitals were contacted regarding a Nordic randomized controlled trial exploring effects and complications associated with the use of nasogastric tube use after esophagectomy for cancer. Those who chose to join the trial were sent a questionnaire regarding surgical and perioperative routines. Results Twelve centers with a combined catchment area of 16 million inhabitants and an annual volume of 400 esophagectomies joined the trial network. All but one used totally minimally invasive or hybrid surgical approach. All 12 centers reported routine use of NG-tube and 5 employed continuous suction. The NG-tube was removed between 3 and 7 days postoperatively. A routine pylorus drainage procedure was reported from two centers. Jejunostomy was used universally in 5 centers and selectively in 6 centers. One center did not use jejunostomy. Conclusion Differences in perioperative care after esophagectomy is apparent in the Nordic countries, highlighting the need for high-level evidence regarding these practices. A unified approach may facilitate clinical trial initiatives. There is a paucity of evidence regarding optimal NG-tube use after esophagectomy for cancer and a randomized trial investigating this issue is under way. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Previous studies have shown that the rapid transition to emergency remote teaching due to the COVID-19 pandemic was challenging for healthcare teachers in many ways. This sudden change made them face ethical dilemmas that challenged their values and ethical competence., Research Aim: This study aimed to explore and gain a deeper understanding of the ethical dilemmas healthcare teachers faced during the COVID-19 pandemic., Research Design: This was an inductive qualitative study using a hermeneutic approach. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and analysed thematically., Participants and Research Context: Healthcare teachers ( n = 20) from eight universities and universities of applied sciences in the Nordic and Baltic countries participated., Ethical Considerations: This study was based on the research ethics of the Norwegian National Research Ethics Committee for Medicine and Health Sciences and approved by the Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research., Findings: Healthcare teachers faced several ethical dilemmas due to restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis revealed three main themes: How should I deal with students' ill-being, and what can I as a teacher do?; What can I demand from myself and my students, what is good teaching?; How do I manage the heavy workload and everyone's needs, and who gets my time?, Conclusions: This study highlights the importance of healthcare teachers' continuous need for pedagogic and didactic education, especially considering new technology and ethical issues. During the pandemic, the ethical consequences of remote teaching became evident. Ethical values and ethical dilemmas should be addressed in healthcare education programmes at different levels, especially in teacher education programmes. In the coming years, remote teaching will grow. Therefore, we need more research on this issue from an ethical perspective on its possible consequences for students and healthcare teachers., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.