Search

Backgrounds: Laparoscopic surgery is widely used in abdominal emergency surgery (AES), and the possibility of extending this approach to the more recent robotic surgery (RS) arouses great interest. The slow diffusion of robotic technology mainly due to high costs and the longer RS operative time when compared to laparoscopy may represent disincentives, especially in AES. This study aims to report our experience in the use of RS in AES assessing its safety and feasibility, with particular focus on intra- and post-operative complications, conversion rate, and surgical learning curve. Our data were also compared to other experiences though an extensive literature review. Methods: We retrospectively analysed a single surgeon series of the last 10 years. From January 2014 to December 2023, 36 patients underwent urgent or emergency RS. The robotic devices used were Da Vinci Si (15 cases) and Xi (21 cases). Results: 36 (4.3%) out of 834 robotic procedures were included in our analysis: 20 (56.56%) females. The mean age was 63 years and 30% of patients were ≥ 70 years. 2 (5.55%) procedures were performed at night. No conversions to open were reported in this series. According to the Clavien-Dindo classification, 2 (5.5%) major complications were collected. Intraoperative and 30-day mortality were 0%. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that RS may be a useful and reliable approach also to AES and intraoperative laparoscopic complications when performed in selected hemodynamically stable patients in very well-trained robotic centers. The technology may increase the minimally invasive use and conversion rate in emergent settings in a completely robotic or hybrid approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Obtaining prospective written consent from women to participate in trials when they are experiencing an obstetric emergency is challenging. Alternative consent pathways, such as gaining verbal consent at enrolment followed, later, by obtaining written consent, have been advocated by some clinicians and bioethicists but have received little empirical attention. We explored women's and staff views about the consent procedures used during the internal pilot of a trial (GOT-IT), where the protocol permitted staff to gain verbal consent at recruitment.Methods: Interviews with staff (n = 27) and participating women (n = 22). Data were analysed thematically and interviews were cross-compared to identify differences and similarities in participants' views about the consent procedures used.Results: Women and some staff highlighted benefits to obtaining verbal consent at trial enrolment, including expediting recruitment and reducing the burden on those left exhausted by their births. However, most staff with direct responsibility for taking consent expressed extreme reluctance to proceed with enrolment until they had obtained written consent, despite being comfortable using verbal procedures in their clinical practice. To account for this resistance, staff drew a strong distinction between research and clinical care and suggested that a higher level of consent was needed when recruiting into trials. In doing so, staff emphasised the need to engage women in reflexive decision-making and highlighted the role that completing the consent form could play in enabling and evidencing this process. While most staff cited their ethical responsibilities to women, they also voiced concerns that the absence of a signed consent form at recruitment could expose them to greater risk of litigation were an individual to experience a complication during the trial. Inexperience of recruiting into peripartum trials and limited availability of staff trained to take consent also reinforced preferences for obtaining written consent at recruitment.Conclusions: While alternative consent pathways have an important role to play in advancing emergency medicine research, and may be appreciated by potential recruits, they may give rise to unintended ethical and logistical challenges for staff. Staff would benefit from training and support to increase their confidence and willingness to recruit into trials using alternative consent pathways.Trial Registration: This qualitative research was undertaken as part of the GOT-IT Trial (trial registration number: ISCRTN 88609453 ). Date of registration 26/03/2014. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In resource-poor settings, treatment adherence is a major determinant of response to anti-malarial drugs as most are taken at home without medical supervision. Evidence on adherence to artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) is limited. The study aimed to measure adherence and identify reasons for non-adherence to a 3-day, fixed-dose combination (FDC) of artesunate–amodiaquine (ASAQ), the first-line treatment for uncomplicated malaria in the Médecins Sans Frontières project in the Shabunda Health Zone, South Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, a highly malarious and conflict-affected area. Methods: The study took place in the health centres/outpatient departments of the Shabunda general hospital, the quarter Mbangayo, and participant households. Patients prescribed FDC ASAQ were visited at home on the day after their regimen finished and asked to complete an adherence questionnaire. Patients/caretakers were also interviewed when exiting the outpatient department to understand their attitude towards FDC ASAQ and assess the quality of the prescribing process. Results: 148 patients/caretakers completed the adherence questionnaire: 11.5 % (17/148, 95 % CI 7–17) had ≥1 tablet left at the time of the home visit and were defined as certainly non-adherent; 13.5 % (20/148, 95 % CI 8–19) were probably non-adherent; thus total non-adherence was 25.0 % (37/148, 95 % CI 18–32). 75 % (111/148, 95 % CI 68–82) were defined as probably adherent. In exit interviews, 87.5 % (105/120) knew they had malaria or could name the correct signs/symptoms. 89 % (107/120) could identify FDC ASAQ as anti-malarials among all tablets given and correctly repeat the intake instructions given at the outpatient department. Conclusions: This is the first study to assess adherence to an FDC of ACT under real treatment conditions in a context of high instability. High quality prescribing of anti-malarials at health centre level and patient adherence to the correct intake of ACT were possible in this setting. Adherence to treatment regimen requires careful and constant monitoring which might be better guaranteed at health centre rather than community level. It could, nevertheless, be a precondition to the successful introduction of home- or community based management of malaria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]