Search

Purpose: Patients from deprived areas are more likely to experience longer waiting times for elective surgery, be multimorbid, and have inferior outcomes from elective and emergency surgery. This study aims to investigate how surgical outcomes vary by deprivation for patients undergoing elective abdominal wall reconstruction., Methods: A three-centre retrospective cohort study was conducted across three hospitals in North-West England, including patients with complex ventral hernias undergoing abdominal wall reconstruction between 2013 and 2021. Demographic data, comorbidities, and index of multiple deprivation quintiles were recorded., Results: 234 patients (49.6% female), age 57 (SD 13) years, underwent elective abdominal wall reconstruction. Significantly higher unemployment rates were found in the most deprived quintiles (Q1 and Q2). There were more smokers in Q1 and Q2, but no significant deprivation related differences in BMI, diabetes, chronic kidney disease or ischaemic heart disease. There were also higher rates of Clavien-Dindo 1-2 complications in Q1 and Q5, but no difference in the Clavien-Dindo 3-4 outcomes. Patients in Q1 and Q5 had a significantly greater hospital length of stay., Conclusion: The association between deprivation and greater unemployment and smoking rates highlights the potential need for equitable support in patient optimisation. The lack of differences in patient co-morbidities and hernia characteristics could represent the application of standardised operative criteria and thresholds. Further research is needed to better understand the relationship between socioeconomic status, complications, and prolonged hospital length of stay., (© 2024. Crown.)

Purpose: Over the last decade, there has been a rapid rise in the development and refinement of abdominal wall repair (AWR) techniques. Numerous cadaveric AWR training courses have been set up with the goal of helping practicing surgeons learn and incorporate them into their surgical repertoire. Some maybe excellent but their quality and consistency are unknown. The aim of this article is to present a stepwise cadaveric dissection template and checklist to standardize all training on open AWR courses and to help course organizers benchmark the quality of their program., Methods: This article is based on both the authors experience as faculty and course leads of cadaveric AWR courses, and the published anatomical and operative literature. The authors represent the training committee of the European Hernia Society, and the AWR subcommittees of the British Hernia Society and Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain & Ireland., Results: A standardized stepwise approach for the cadaveric training of the most recognized procedures for open AWR, including retrorectus repair, posterior and anterior component separation techniques, is presented. Considerations on delegate selection, pre-course material and testing, course structure, and cadaveric models is also provided., Conclusion: Time and financial resources for surgeons to attend courses to learn and hone the skills required for safe effective AWR is limited. Ideally all courses should deliver up to date consistent training of the highest quality. One step to achieve this is by developing a standardized approach to ensure delegate understanding of the operative steps and key anatomical features., Competing Interests: Declarations. Competing interests: The author has no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: The National Training Programme for laparoscopic colorectal surgery in England was implemented to ensure training was supervised, structured, safe and effective. Delegates were required to pass a competency assessment (sign-off) before undertaking independent practice. This study described the types of errors identified and associated these errors with competency to progress to independent laparoscopic colorectal practice., Methods: All sign-off submissions from the start of the process in January 2008 until July 2013 were included. Content analysis was used to categorise errors. Bayes factor (BF) was used to measure the impact of individual error on assessment outcome. A smaller BF indicates that an error has stronger associations with unsuccessful assessments. Bayesian network was employed to graphically represent the reasoning process whereby the chance of successful assessment diminished with the identification of each error. Quality of the error feedback was measured by the area under the ROC curve which linked the predictions from the Bayesian model to the expert verdict., Results: Among 370 assessments analysed, 240 passed and 130 failed. On average, 2.5 different types of error were identified in each assessment. Cases that were more likely to fail had three or more different types of error (χ(2) = 72, p < 0.0001) and demonstrated poorer technical skills (CAT score <2.7, χ(2) = 164, p < 0.0001). Case complexity or right- versus left-sided resection did not have a significant impact. Errors associated with dissection (BF = 0.18), anastomosis (BF = 0.23) and oncological quality (BF = 0.19) were critical determinants of surgical competence, each reducing the odds of pass by at least fourfold. The area under the ROC curve was 0.84., Conclusions: Errors associated with dissection, anastomosis and oncological quality were critical determinants of surgical competency. The detailed error analysis reported in this study can guide the design of future surgical education and clinical training programmes.