Search

Background: Emergencies and emergency surgeries are a central part of everyday surgical care in Germany. However, it is unclear how emergency surgery is practically trained in clinics on a daily basis and what training concept is underlying. Therefore, the aim of this survey study was to capture the status quo of emergency surgical training of German general and visceral surgeons. Methods: The members of the German Society for General and Visceral Surgery were surveyed online (n = 5281). The questionnaire included demographic data and expertise in surgery and assistance in emergency surgery regarding common emergency surgical operations. In addition, further training measures in emergency surgery and their support by employers were queried. Results: Only complete questionnaires (n = 184, response rate 3.5%) were included in the analysis. Most participants were in training (n = 69; 38%), followed by senior physicians (n = 52; 29%), specialists (n = 31; 17%) and chief physicians (n = 30; 17%). 64% of the participants were employed at university hospitals or maximum care hospitals. Regarding further training opportunities, in-clinic shock room training was most frequently used. Outside of their own clinic, the ATLS course was most frequently mentioned. Operations for cholecystitis and appendicitis as well as emergency stoma procedures are the most common emergency procedures. There was a strong difference in the frequency of operated cases depending on the level of training. For operations to treat acute abdominal traumas (hemostasis of liver and spleen, packing) as well as outside of visceral surgery, only low competence was reported. Over 90% of survey participants consider emergency surgery to be an indispensable core competence. Neither in the old (76%) nor in the new training regulations (47%) is emergency surgery adequately represented according to the participants' assessment. There was a significantly lower prevalence of the "sub-steps concept" in emergency surgery at 38% compared to elective surgery (44%). Important elements of imparting skills in emergency surgery are simulation and courses as well as operative sub-steps, according to the majority of survey participants. Conclusion: The results show that general and visceral surgeons in Germany are introduced to emergency surgery too little structured during further training and at specialist level. The survey participants had, as expected, hardly any experience in emergency surgery outside of visceral surgery but surprisingly also little experience in visceral surgical trauma care. There is a need to discuss the future organization of emergency surgical training. Adequate simulation structures and extracurricular courses could contribute to an improvement in this respect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Every year around 70,000 people in Germany suffer from an abdominal incisional hernia that requires surgical treatment. Five years after reconstruction about 25% reoccur. Incisional hernias are usually closed with mesh using various reconstruction techniques, summarized here as standard reconstruction (SR). To improve hernia repair, we established a concept for biomechanically calculated reconstructions (BCR). In the BCR, two formulas enable customized patient care through standardized biomechanical measures. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of SR and BCR of incisional hernias after 1 year of follow-up based on the Herniamed registry. Methods: SR includes open retromuscular mesh augmented incisional hernia repair according to clinical guidelines. BCR determines the required strength (Critical Resistance to Impacts related to Pressure = CRIP) preoperatively depending on the hernia size. It supports the surgeon in reliably determining the Gained Resistance, based on the mesh-defect-area-ratio, further mesh and suture factors, and the tissue stability. To compare SR and BCR repair outcomes in incisional hernias at 1 year, propensity score matching was performed on 15 variables. Included were 301 patients with BCR surgery and 23,220 with standard repair. Results: BCR surgeries show a significant reduction in recurrences (1.7% vs. 5.2%, p = 0.0041), pain requiring treatment (4.1% vs. 12.0%, p = 0.001), and pain at rest (6.9% vs. 12.7%, p = 0.033) when comparing matched pairs. Complication rates, complication-related reoperations, and stress-related pain showed no systematic difference. Conclusion: Biomechanically calculated repairs improve patient care. BCR shows a significant reduction in recurrence rates, pain at rest, and pain requiring treatment at 1-year follow-up compared to SR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Neue Kriminalpolitik is the property of Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed medical care worldwide. General surgery has been affected in elective procedures, yet the implications for emergency surgery are unclear. The current study analyzes the effect of the COVID-19 lockdown in spring 2020 on appendicitis treatment in Germany. Methods: Hospitals that provided emergency surgical care during the COVID-19 lockdown were invited to participate. All patients diagnosed with appendicitis during the lockdown period (10 weeks) and, as a comparison group, patients from the same period in 2019 were analyzed. Clinical and laboratory parameters, intraoperative and pathological findings, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Results: A total of 1915 appendectomies from 41 surgical departments in Germany were included. Compared to 2019 the number of appendectomies decreased by 13.5% (1.027 to 888, p=0.003) during the first 2020 COVID-19 lockdown. The delay between the onset of symptoms and medical consultation was substantially longer in the COVID-19 risk group and for the elderly. The rate of complicated appendicitis increased (58.2 to 64.4%), while the absolute number of complicated appendicitis decreased from 597 to 569, (p=0.012). The rate of negative appendectomies decreased significantly (6.7 to 4.6%; p=0.012). Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality, however, did not change. Conclusion: The COVID-19 lockdown had significant effects on abdominal emergency surgery in Germany. These seem to result from a stricter selection and a longer waiting time between the onset of symptoms and medical consultation for risk patients. However, the standard of emergency surgical care in Germany was maintained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Germany as elsewhere, standardized recommendations are lacking on the avoidance of physical exertion to protect the abdom - inal wall in patients who have recently undergone abdominal surgery. It is unclear how much stress the abdominal wall can withstand and how long the patient should be exempted from work. The goal of this review is to determine whether there are any standardized, evidence-based recommendations for postoperative care from which valid recommendations for Germany can be derived. Methods: We systematically searched the literature for evidence-based recommendations on exertion avoidance after abdominal surgery, as well as for information on the extent to which postoperative abdominal wall stress contributes to incisional hernia formation. We then created a questionnaire on recommendation practices and sent it to all of the chiefs of general and visceral surgery services that were listed in the German hospital registry (1078 chiefs of service as of June 2016). Results: All 16 of the included studies on postoperative exertion avoidance contained low-level evidence that could only be used to formulate weak recommendations ("can," rather than "should" or "must"). Some 50 000 incisional hernia repair procedures are performed in Germany each year, with a reported incidence of 12.8% in the first two years after surgery. The scientifically documented risk factors for incisional herniation are related to techniques of wound closure, the suture materials used, wound infections, and the patient risk profile. From the biological point of view, the abdominal wall regains full, normal resistance to exertional stress 30 days after a laparotomy with uncomplicated healing. Most incisional hernias (>50%) arise 18 months or more after surgery; they are more common in patients who have avoided exertion for longer periods of time (more than 8 weeks). Our questionnaire was returned by 386 surgical clinics. The responses showed that 78% of recommendations were based on personal experience only. The recommendations varied widely; exertion avoidance was recommended for as long as 6 months. Conclusion: The dilemma of a deficient evidence base for postoperative exertion avoidance to protect the abdominal wall should be resolved with the much higher-quality evidence available from hernia research, which concerns the patient population with the biologically least favorable starting conditions. Based on our analysis of the available literature in light of the biomechanical principles of abdominal wall healing, we propose a new set of recommendations on postoperative exertion avoidance after abdominal surgery, with the goal of eliminating excessively protracted exertion avoidance and enabling a timely return to work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Kriminologisches Journal is the property of Julius Beltz GmbH & Co. KG Beltz Juventa and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Fever control plays a key role in therapy of patients with acute brain injury. The infusion of cold saline could serve as an alternative or additional method for targeted temperature management. However, it is difficult to estimate the amount of fluid required to achieve normothermia merely on the basis of body weight. There is no standardized load management regarding the administration of cold saline, and no closed-loop systems based on continuous temperature-controlled feedback are available. The primary purpose of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of a new automated fluid infusion system.Methods: Twelve patients with acute brain injury and febrile episodes were treated with the automated infusion device tempedy (seiratherm GmbH, Herzogenaurach, Germany). Patients were included if bladder temperature still was ≥ 37.9 °C after administration of antipyretic medication, cold washing solutions, and ice packs more than 2 h earlier. The efficacy was examined by measuring the time and amount of fluid needed to reach and maintain target temperature. Feasibility and safety were assessed based on recording any technical difficulties with the new device and the occurrence of clinical signs of fluid overload such as acute pulmonary edema, electrolyte disturbances, or acid-base dysfunction.Results: The mean time was 73 min (range from 15 to 330 min) and 1650 ml the mean amount of fluid (21.2 ml/kg; SD 28.5 ml/kg) to reach the target temperature. The mean total fluid balance to reach and maintain the target temperature in the first 12 h was 1350 ml (SD 1550 ml). In the first 12 h 89.4% of the time temperature values were in the target range (median 95.3%, range 83.8-10%). No clinical signs of fluid overload such as an acute pulmonary edema or device-related adverse events occurred.Conclusion: Target temperature management with the new automated infusion device is feasible. Although we provided first data regarding safety, further controlled randomized studies are needed to evaluate the long-time safety, as well as the best indications and timing for this cooling device. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The European Practice Assessment program provides feedback and outreach visits to primary care practices to facilitate quality improvement in five domains (infrastructure, people, information, finance, and quality and safety). We examined the effectiveness of this program in improving management in primary care practices in Germany, with a focus on the domain of quality and safety. Methods: In a before-after study, 102 primary care practices completed a practice assessment using the European Practice Assessment instrument at baseline and three years later (intervention group). A comparative group of 102 practices was included that completed their first assessment using this instrument at the time of the intervention group's second assessment. Mean scores were based on the proportion of indicators for which a positive response was achieved by all of the practices, on a scale of 0 to 100. Results: We found significant improvements in all domains between the first and second assessments in the intervention group. In the domain of quality and safety, improvements in scores (mean scores were based on the proportion of indicators for which a positive response was achieved by all of the practices, on a scale of 0 to 100) were observed in the following dimensions: complaint management (from a mean score of 51.2 at first assessment to 80.7 at second assessment); analysis of critical incidents (from 79.1 to 89.6); and quality development, quality policy (from 40.7 to 55.6). Overall scores at the time of the second assessment were significantly higher in the intervention group than in the comparative group. Interpretation: Primary care practices that completed the European Practice Assessment instrument twice over a three-year period showed improvements in practice management. Our findings show the value of the quality-improvement cycle in the context of practice assessment and the use of established organizational standards for practice management with the Europeaen Practice Assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The role of emergency physicians in the pre-hospital management of severely injured patients remains controversial. In Germany and Austria, an emergency physician is present at the scene of an emergency situation or is called to such a scene in order to provide pre-hospital care to severely injured patients in approximately 95% of all cases. By contrast, in the United States and the United Kingdom, paramedics, i.e. non-physician teams, usually provide care to an injured person both at the scene of an incident and en route to an appropriate hospital. We investigated whether physician or non-physician care offers more benefits and what type of on-site care improves outcome.Material and Methods: In a matched-pair analysis using data from the trauma registry of the German Trauma Society, we retrospectively (2002-2011) analysed the pre-hospital management of severely injured patients (ISS ≥16) by physician and non-physician teams. Matching criteria were age, overall injury severity, the presence of relevant injuries to the head, chest, abdomen or extremities, the cause of trauma, the level of consciousness, and the presence of shock.Results: Each of the two groups, i.e. patients who were attended by an emergency physician and those who received non-physician care, consisted of 1235 subjects. There was no significant difference between the two groups in pre-hospital time (61.1 [SD 28.9] minutes for the physician group and 61.9 [SD 30.9] minutes for non-physician group). Significant differences were found in the number of pre-hospital procedures such as fluid administration, analgosedation and intubation. There was a highly significant difference (p<0.001) in the number of patients who received no intervention at all applying to 348 patients (28.2%) treated by non-physician teams and to only 31 patients (2.5%) in the physician-treated group. By contrast, there was no significant difference in mortality within the first 24h and in mortality during hospitalisation.Conclusion: This retrospective analysis does not allow definitive conclusions to be drawn about the optimal model of pre-hospital care. It shows, however, that there was no significant difference in mortality although patients who were attended by non-physician teams received fewer pre-hospital interventions with similar scene times. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research in military medicine and in particular combat surgery is a broad field that has gained international importance during the last decade. In the context of increased NATO missions, this also holds true for the Bundeswehr (German Armed Forces); however, medical officers in surgery must balance research between their clinical work load, missions, civilian and family obligation., Material and Methods: To evaluate engagement with and interest in research, a questionnaire was distributed among the doctors of the surgical departments of the Bundeswehr hospitals by the newly founded working group Chirurgische Forschung der Bundeswehr (surgical research of the Bundeswehr). Returned data were recorded from October 2013 to January 2014 and descriptive statistics were performed., Results: Answers were received from 87 out of 193 military surgeons (45 %). Of these 81 % announced a general interest in research with a predominance on clinical research in preference to experimental settings. At the time of the evaluation 32 % of the participants were actively involved in research and 53 % regarded it as difficult to invest time in research activities parallel to clinical work. Potential keys to increase the interest and engagement in research were seen in the implementation of research coordinators and also in a higher amount of free time, for example by research rotation., Conclusion: Research can be regarded as having a firm place in the daily work of medical officers in the surgical departments of the Bundeswehr; however, the engagement is limited by time and structural factors. At the departmental level and in the command structures of the military medical service, more efforts are recommended in the future in order to enhance the engagement with surgical research. This evaluation should be repeated in the coming years as a measuring instrument and data should be compared in an international context.

Background: The management of gunshot wounds is a rare challenge for trauma surgeons in Germany and Central Europe as a result of the low incidence of this type of trauma. Penetrating injuries occur with an incidence of 5% in Germany. They are caused by gunshots or more commonly by knives or other objects, for example during accidents. Since even the number of patients who are treated at level 1 trauma centres is limited by the low incidence, the objective of this study was to assess the epidemiology and outcome of gunshot and stab wounds in Germany., Material and Methods: Since 2009, the trauma registry of the German Trauma Society (TraumaRegister DGU®) has been used to assess not only whether a trauma was penetrating but also whether it was caused by a gunshot or a stabbing. On the basis of this registry, we identified relevant cases and defined the observation period. Data were taken from the standard documentation forms that participating German hospitals completed between 2009 and 2011. We did not specify exclusion criteria in order to obtain as comprehensive a picture as possible of the trauma entities investigated in this study. As a result of the high incidence of gunshot wounds to the head and the implications of this type of injury for the entire group, a subgroup of patients without head injuries was analysed., Results: From 2009 to 2011, there were 305 patients with gunshot wounds and 871 patients with stab wounds. The high proportion of suicide-related gunshot wounds to the head resulted in a cumulative mortality rate of 39.7%. Stab wounds were associated with a lower mortality rate (6.2%). Every fourth patient with a gunshot or stab wound presented with haemorrhagic shock, which was considerably more frequently seen during the prehospital phase than during the inhospital phase of patient management. Of the patients with gunshot wounds, 26.9% required transfusions. This percentage was three times higher than that for patients with blunt trauma., Conclusion: In Germany, gunshot and stab wounds have a low incidence and are mostly caused by violent crime or attempted suicide. Depending on the site of injury, they have a high mortality and are often associated with major haemorrhage. As a result of the low incidence of these types of trauma, further data and analyses are required which can provide the basis for an evaluation of the long-term quality of the management of patients with stab or gunshot wounds.