Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundRegional variations in healthcare outcomes in England have been historically reported. This study analyses the variations in long term colorectal cancer survival across different regions in England. MethodsRelative survival analysis of population data obtained from all cancer registries in England between 2010 and 2014.ResultsTotally, 167,501 patients were studied. Regions in the southern England had better outcomes with Southwest and Oxford registries having 63.5 and 62.7% 5 year relative survival. In contrast, Trent and Northwest cancer registries had 58.1% relative survival (p < 0.01). The regions in the north fared below the national average. The survival outcomes reflected socio-economic deprivation status, the best performing regions in the south having low levels of deprivation (5.3 and 6.5% having maximum deprivation in Southwest and Oxford, respectively). The regions with worst long term cancer outcomes had high levels of deprivation with 25% and 17% having high levels of deprivation in Northwest and Trent regions.ConclusionThere are significant variations in long term colorectal cancer survival between different regions in England, southern England had better relative survival when compared with the northern regions. Disparities in socio-economic depravation status in different regions may be associated with worse colorectal cancer outcomes.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of worldwide morbidity and mortality. Surgical treatment is common, and there is a great need to improve the delivery of such care. The gold standard for evaluating surgery is within well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, the impact of RCTs is diminished by a lack of coordinated outcome measurement and reporting. A solution to these issues is to develop an agreed standard \"core\" set of outcomes to be measured in all trials to facilitate cross-study comparisons, meta-analysis, and minimize outcome reporting bias. This study defines a core outcome set for CRC surgery. The scope of this COS includes clinical effectiveness trials of surgical interventions for colorectal cancer. Excluded were nonsurgical oncological interventions. Potential outcomes of importance to patients and professionals were identified through systematic literature reviews and patient interviews. All outcomes were transcribed verbatim and categorized into domains by two independent researchers. This informed a questionnaire survey that asked stakeholders (patients and professionals) from United Kingdom CRC centers to rate the importance of each domain. Respondents were resurveyed following group feedback (Delphi methods). Outcomes rated as less important were discarded after each survey round according to predefined criteria, and remaining outcomes were considered at three consensus meetings; two involving international professionals and a separate one with patients. A modified nominal group technique was used to gain the final consensus. Data sources identified 1,216 outcomes of CRC surgery that informed a 91 domain questionnaire. First round questionnaires were returned from 63 out of 81 (78%) centers, including 90 professionals, and 97 out of 267 (35%) patients. Second round response rates were high for all stakeholders (>80%). Analysis of responses lead to 45 and 23 outcome domains being retained after the first and second surveys, respectively. Consensus meetings generated agreement on a 12 domain COS. This constituted five perioperative outcome domains (including anastomotic leak), four quality of life outcome domains (including fecal urgency and incontinence), and three oncological outcome domains (including long-term survival). This study used robust consensus methodology to develop a core outcome set for use in colorectal cancer surgical trials. It is now necessary to validate the use of this set in research practice.

Background The self-taught learning curve in laparoscopic colorectal surgery (LCS) is between 100 and 150 cases. Supervised training has been shown to shorten the proficiency gain curve of senior specialist surgeons. Little is known about the learning curve of LCS trainees undergoing mentored training. The aim of this study was to analyze the proficiency gain curve and clinical outcomes of English surgical trainees during laparoscopic colorectal surgery fellowships. Methods In 2010 the educational, Web-based platform from the National Training Program in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery in England was newly available to surgical trainees undertaking a laparoscopic colorectal fellowship. These fellows were asked to submit clinical outcomes, including patient demographics and case specifications. In addition, self-perceived performance was evaluated using a validated task-specific self-assessment form [global assessment scale (GAS) range 1–6]. Proficiency gain curves and learning rates were evaluated using risk-adjusted (RA) cumulative sum (CUSUM) curves. Results Of 654 cases 608 were included for analysis. The clinical outcomes included 9.2 % conversions, 16.9 % complications, 4 % reoperations, 2.6 % readmissions and a 0.8 % in-hospital mortality rate. RA CUSUM curves for complications and reoperation do not show a learning effect. However, the RA CUSUM curve for conversion has an inflection point at 24 cases. The GAS CUSUM curves for ‘setup’ and ‘exposure’ have inflection points at case 15 and case 29 respectively. The curves for ‘mobilization of colon,’ ‘vascular pedicle’ and ‘anastomosis’ plateau towards the end of the training period. ‘Flexure’ and ‘mesorectum’ do not of reach a plateau by case 40. Conclusions Supervised fellowships provide training in LCS without compromising patient safety. Forty cases are required for the fellows to feel confident to perform the majority of tasks except dissection of the mesorectum and flexure, which will require further training.

Introduction The National Training Program for laparoscopic colorectal surgery (LCS) provides supervised training to colorectal surgeons in England. The purpose of this study was to create, validate, and implement a method for monitoring training progression in laparoscopic colorectal surgery that met the requirements of a good assessment tool. Methods A generic scale for different tasks in LCS was created under the guidance of a national expert group. The scores were defined by the extent to which the trainees were dependent on support (1 = unable to perform, 5 = unaided (benchmark), 6 = proficient). Trainers were asked to rate their trainees after each supervised case; trainees completed a similar self-assessment form. Construct validity was evaluated comparing scores of trainees at different experience levels (1–5, 6–10, 11–15, 16+) using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and ANOVA. Internal consistency was determined by Crohnbach’s alpha, interrater reliability by comparing peer- and self-assessment (interclass correlation coefficient, ICC). Proficiency gain curves were plotted using CUSUM charts. Results Analysis included 610 assessments (333 by trainers and 277 by trainees). There was high interrater reliability (ICC = 0.867), internal consistency (α = 0.920), and construct validity [F(3,40) = 6.128, p  < 0.001]. Detailed analysis of proficiency gain curves demonstrates that theater setup, exposure, and anastomosis were performed independently after 5 to 15 sessions, and the dissection of the vascular pedicle took 24 cases. Mobilization of the colon and of the splenic/hepatic flexure took more than 25 procedures. Median assessment time was 3.3 (interquartile range (IQR) 1–5) minutes and the tool was accepted as useful [median score 5 of 6 (IQR 4–5)]. Discussion A valid and reliable monitoring tool for surgical training has been implemented successfully into the National Training Program. It provides a description of an individualized proficiency gain curve in terms of both the level of support required and the competency level achieved.

Objective‘Core information sets’ (CISs) represent baseline information, agreed by patients and professionals, to stimulate individualised patient-centred discussions. This study developed a CIS for use before colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery.DesignThree phase consensus study: (1) Systematic literature reviews and patient interviews to identify potential information of importance to patients, (2) UK national Delphi survey of patients and professionals to rate the importance of the information, (3) international consensus meeting to agree on the final CIS.SettingUK CRC centres.ParticipantsPurposive sampling was conducted to ensure CRC centre representation based upon geographical region and caseload volume. Responses were received from 63/81 (78%) centres (90 professionals). Adult patients who had undergone CRC surgery were eligible, and purposive sampling was conducted to ensure representation based on age, sex and cancer location (rectum, left and right colon). Responses were received from 97/267 (35%) patients with a wide age range (29–87), equal sex ratio and cancer location. Attendees of the international Tripartite Colorectal Conference were eligible for the consensus meeting.OutcomesPhase 1: Information of potential importance to patients was extracted verbatim and operationalised into a Delphi questionnaire. Phase 2: Patients and professionals rated the importance information on a 9-point Likert scale, and resurveyed following group feedback. Information rated of low importance were discarded using predefined criteria. Phase 3: A modified nominal group technique was used to gain final consensus in separate consensus meetings with patients and professionals.ResultsData sources identified 1216 pieces of information that informed a 98-item questionnaire. Analysis led to 50 and 23 information domains being retained after the first and second surveys, respectively. The final CIS included 11 concepts including specific surgical complications, short and long-term survival, disease recurrence, stoma and quality of life issues.ConclusionsThis study has established a CIS for professionals to discuss with patients before CRC surgery.

IntroductionThere has been a constant increase in the number of published surgical videos with preference for open-access sources, but the proportion of videos undergoing peer-review prior to publication has markedly decreased, raising questions over quality of the educational content presented. The aim of this study was the development and validation of a standard framework for the appraisal of surgical videos submitted for presentation and publication, the LAParoscopic surgery Video Educational GuidelineS (LAP-VEGaS) video assessment tool.MethodsAn international committee identified items for inclusion in the LAP-VEGaS video assessment tool and finalised the marking score utilising Delphi methodology. The tool was finally validated by anonymous evaluation of selected videos by a group of validators not involved in the tool development.Results9 items were included in the LAP-VEGaS video assessment tool, with every item scoring from 0 (item not presented in the video) to 2 (item extensively presented in the video), with a total marking score ranging from 0 to 18. The LAP-VEGaS video assessment tool resulted highly accurate in identifying and selecting videos for acceptance for conference presentation and publication, with high level of internal consistency and generalisability.ConclusionsWe propose that peer review in adherence to the LAP-VEGaS video assessment tool could enhance the overall quality of published video outputs.Graphic Abstract

Introduction Currently, no prerequisite teaching qualification is required to serve as faculty for SAGES hands-on courses (SAGES-HOC). The Lapco-Train-the-Trainers (Lapco-TT) is a course for surgical trainers, in which delegates learn a standardized teaching technique for skills acquisition. The aims of this study were to 1) determine if this curriculum could be delivered in a day course to SAGES-HOC faculty and 2) assess the impact of such training on learners’ educational experience taught by this faculty at a subsequent SAGES-HOC. Methods and procedures Six experts attended a one-day Lapco-TT course. SAGES-HOC participants were split into two groups: Group A taught by Lapco-TT trained, and Group B by “untrained” course faculty. Opinion surveys were completed by both the SAGES-HOC learners and the Lapco-TT trained course faculty. Furthermore, the latter underwent self-, learner-, and observer-based evaluation using a previously validated teaching assessment tool (cSTTAR). Mean scores were reported and analyzed [Mann–Whitney U, t test ( p  < 0.05)]. Results All 6 Lapco-TT delegates found the course useful (5), and felt that it would influence the way they taught in the OR (4.83), that their course objectives were met (4.83), and that they would recommend the course to their colleagues (4.83). Of the SAGES-HOC participants, compared to Group B ( n  = 22), Group A learners( n  = 10) better understood what they were supposed to learn (5 vs. 4.15 [ p  = 0.046]) and do (5 vs. 4 [ p  = 0.046]), felt that the session was well organized (5 vs. 4 [ p  = 0.046]), that time was used effectively (5 vs. 3.9 [ p  = 0.046]), and that performance feedback was sufficient (5 vs. 3.9 [ p  = 0.028]) and effective (5 vs. 3.95 [ p  = 0.028]). Group A faculty were rated significantly higher by their learners on the cSTTARs than Group B ( p  < 0.0005). Group A faculty rated themselves significantly lower than both expert observers ( p  < 0.0005) and compared to the Group B faculty’s self-assessment ( p  < 0.002). Conclusions The Lapco-TT course can be delivered effectively over one day and impacts the educational experience of learners at a SAGES-HOC. This could help establish a standardized method of teaching at SAGES-HOCs and thereby increase their value for learners.

IntroductionHysterectomy is the most common major gynaecological procedure in women and minimally invasive approaches should be used wherever possible; total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) is one such surgical approach which allows removal of the uterus entirely laparoscopically. However, lack of surgical training opportunities is impeding its increased adoption. This study will formally test a surgical outreach training model to equip surgeons with the skills to provide TLH as an alternative to total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH).Methods and analysisStepped wedge implementation trial of a surgical training programme for practising obstetrician gynaecologist specialists in four hospitals.Primary outcomesChange in the proportion of hysterectomies performed by TAH, measured between preintervention and postintervention; we aim to reduce TAH by at least 30% in 75% of the trainees.Secondary outcomes(1) Number of hospitals screened, eligible, agree to training and complete the training; (2) number of surgeons screened for eligibility, eligible, agree to training, who complete training and achieve proficiency; (3) proportion of trainees achieving proficiency in correct theatre setup, vascular exposure, mobilisation and surgery closure; change in proportion proficient over time; (4) adverse events (conversion from TLH to TAH, anaesthetic incident, intraoperative visceral injury, red cell transfusions, hospital stay >7 days, incidental finding of malignancy, unplanned readmission, admission to intensive care, return to theatre, postoperative pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis, development of a fistula, vault haematoma, vaginal vault dehiscence or pelvic infection); (5) hospital length-of-stay; (6) cost-effectiveness and (7) trainee surgeon proficiency with TLH.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee and has received site-specific approval from all participating hospitals. Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration number NCT03617354; Pre-results.

Background There is a lack of educational tools available for surgical teaching critique, particularly for advanced laparoscopic surgery. The aim was to develop and implement a tool that assesses training quality and structures feedback for trainers in the English National Training Programme for laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Methods Semi-structured interviews were performed and analysed, and items were extracted. Through the Delphi process, essential items pertaining to desirable trainer characteristics, training structure and feedback were determined. An assessment tool (Structured Training Trainer Assessment Report—STTAR) was developed and tested for feasibility, acceptability and educational impact. Results Interview transcripts (29 surgical trainers, 10 trainees, four educationalists) were analysed, and item lists created and distributed for consensus opinion (11 trainers and seven trainees). The STTAR consisted of 64 factors, and its web-based version, the mini-STTAR, included 21 factors that were categorised into four groups (training structure, training behaviour, trainer attributes and role modelling) and structured around a training session timeline (beginning, middle and end). The STTAR (six trainers, 48 different assessments) demonstrated good internal consistency ( α  = 0.88) and inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.75). The mini-STTAR demonstrated good inter-item reliability ( α  = 0.79) and intra-observer reliability on comparison of 85 different trainer/trainee combinations ( r  = 0.701, p  = <0.001). Both were found to be feasible and acceptable. The educational report for trainers was found to be useful (4.4 out of 5). Conclusions An assessment tool that evaluates training quality was developed and shown to be reliable, acceptable and of educational value. It has been successfully implemented into the English National Training Programme for laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

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.