A modified Delphi process to establish research priorities in hernia surgery

BACKGROUND

Abdominal wall hernia repair is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures worldwide, yet despite this, there remains a lack of high-quality evidence to support best management. The aim of the study was to use a modified Delphi process to determine future research priorities in this field.

METHODS

Stakeholders were invited by email, using British Hernia Society membership details or Twitter, to submit individual research questions via an online survey. In addition, questions obtained from a patient focus group (PFG) were collated to form Phase I. Two rounds of prioritization by stakeholders (phases II and III) were then completed to determine a final list of research questions. All questions were analyzed on an anonymized basis.

RESULTS

A total of 266 questions, 19 from the PFG, were submitted by 113 stakeholders in Phase I. Of these, 64 questions were taken forward for prioritization in Phase II, which was completed by 107 stakeholders. Following Phase II analysis, 97 stakeholders prioritized 36 questions in Phase III. This resulted in a final list of 14 research questions, 3 of which were from the PFG. Stakeholders included patients and healthcare professionals (consultant surgeons, trainee surgeons and other multidisciplinary members) from over 27 countries during the 3 phases.

CONCLUSION

The study has identified 14 key research priorities pertaining to abdominal wall hernia surgery. Uniquely, these priorities have been determined from participation by both healthcare professionals and patients. These priorities should now be addressed by well-designed, high-quality international collaborative research.

Improved outcomes for patients undergoing colectomy for acute severe inflammatory colitis by adopting a multi-disciplinary care bundle

PURPOSE

Severe inflammatory colitis as a consequence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may not be amenable to medical management, and surgery is often required. The optimal timing of surgery and perioperative therapeutic care requires a formal link between surgical department and gastroenterology which is often lacking. In this study, we assess the impact of adopting a multidisciplinary care bundle on complication rates of subtotal colectomy in IBD patients.

METHODS

This is a single-centre retrospective observational study. Patients were identified through clinical discharge ICD10 codes. Clinical notes of patients who underwent subtotal colectomies from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2019 were analysed. Socio-demographics, diagnosis, and medical and surgical management data were collected. A multimodule bundle, including weekly MDT discussions, was started in our unit on 1 April 2014. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed on these data.

RESULTS

A total of 296 patients were identified with 113 patients of these (38.2%) experiencing a complication post operation. The overall complication rate improved over time (p = 0.023). Those patients treated after the initiation of the MDT bundle had reduced complication rates (44.6% versus 33.7%, p = 0.045). On multivariate analysis, increasing age (1.023 OR; 95% CI 1.004, 1.041) and procedure performed before MDT bundle (3.1 OR; 95% CI 1.689, 5.723) were independent predictors for post-operative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Closer links between gastroenterology and colorectal specialties have improved patient outcomes in our unit. Whilst IBD MDTs have previously been shown to improve outcomes for patients managed medically, we demonstrate that this interaction, implemented as a multidisciplinary care bundle, also improves surgical outcomes.

A cross-sectional study examining the association between MRCS performance and surgeons receiving sanctions against their medical registration

BACKGROUND

Fitness to practice (FtP) investigations by the General Medical Council (GMC) safeguard patients and maintain the integrity of the medical profession. The likelihood of FtP sanctions is influenced by specialty and socio-demographic factors and can be predicted by performance at postgraduate examinations. This is the first study to characterise the prevalence of FtP sanctions in early-career surgeons and to examine the association with performance at the Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination.

METHODS

All UK graduates who attempted MRCS between September 2007-January 2020 were matched to the GMC list of registered medical practitioners. Clinicians who had active FtP sanctions between 28th August 2018 and 28th August 2020 were identified. Data were anonymised by RCS England prior to analysis.

RESULTS

Of 11,660 candidates who attempted MRCS within the study period, only 31 (0.3%) had FtP sanctions between 2018 and 2020. Of these, 12 had active conditions on registration, seven had undertakings and 14 had warnings. There was no statistically significant difference in MRCS performance in either Parts A or B of the examination for those with and those free from FtP sanctions (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In this, the largest study of MRCS candidates to date, the prevalence of active FtP sanctions in early-career surgeons was 0.3%, significantly lower than the prevalence of sanctions across more experienced UK surgeons (0.9%). These data highlight early-career surgeons as a low-risk group for disciplinary action and should reassure patients and medical professionals of the rarity of FtP sanctions.

Surgical training during the COVID-19 pandemic: preparing for future uncertainty

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought unprecedented changes in healthcare and surgical training, with elective operating reduced or stopped, conferences rearranged and examinations cancelled. Trainees and trainers have adapted, creating innovative and resourceful ways to continue learning, enabling progression through surgical training. With rising COVID-19 cases across the world and further waves of infections likely, we reflect on recent changes to surgical training and discuss how best to support the next generation of surgeons during this period of uncertainty.

Prediction of success at UK Specialty Board Examinations using the mandatory postgraduate UK surgical examination

Background

While performance in other mandatory examinations taken at the beginning of a doctor's career are predictive of final training outcomes, the influence early postgraduate surgical examinations might have on success at Specialty Board Exams in the UK is currently unknown. The aim was to investigate whether performance at the mandatory Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination, and other variables, are predictive of success at the Fellowship of the Royal College of Surgeons (FRCS) examination, thus potentially identifying those who may benefit from early academic intervention.

Methods

Pearson correlation coefficients examined the linear relationship between both examinations and logistic regression analysis identified potential independent predictors of FRCS success. All UK medical graduates who attempted either section of FRCS (Sections 1 and 2) between 2012 and 2018 were included.

Results

First attempt pass rates for Sections 1 and 2 FRCS were 87.4 per cent (n = 854) and 91.8 per cent (n = 797) respectively. In logistic regression analysis, sex (male: odds ratio (OR) 2.32, 95 per cent c.i 1.43 to 3.76), age (less than 29 years at graduation: OR 3.22, 1.88 to 5.51), Part B MRCS attempts (1 attempt: OR 1.77, 1.08 to 3.00), Part A score (OR 1.14, 1.09 to 1.89) and Part B score (OR 1.06, 1.03 to 1.09) were independent predictors of Section 1 FRCS success. Predictors of Section 2 FRCS success were age (less than 29 years at graduation: OR 3.55, 2.00 to 6.39), Part A score (OR 1.06, 1.02 to 1.11) and Section 1 FRCS score (OR 1.13, 1.07 to 1.18).

Conclusion

Part A and B MRCS performance were independent predictors of FRCS success, providing further evidence to support the predictive validity of this mandatory postgraduate exam. However, future research must explore the reasons between the attainment gaps observed for different groups of doctors.

Does the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination predict 'on-the-job' performance during UK higher specialty surgical training?

INTRODUCTION

The Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) is a mandatory examination to enter higher surgical specialty training in the UK. It is designed to help to ensure that successful candidates are competent to practice as higher surgical trainees. The annual review of competence progression (ARCP) assesses trainees' competence to progress to the next level of training and can be interpreted as a measure of 'on-the-job' performance. We investigated the relationship between MRCS performance and ARCP outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All UK medical graduates who passed MRCS (Parts A and B) from 2007 to 2016 were included. MRCS scores, attempts and sociodemographics for each candidate were crosslinked with ARCP outcomes (satisfactory, unsatisfactory and insufficient evidence). Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify potential independent predictors of ARCP outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 2570 trainees underwent 11,064 ARCPs; 1589 (61.8%) had only satisfactory outcomes recorded throughout training; 510 (19.9%) had at least one unsatisfactory outcome; and 471 (18.3%) supplied insufficient evidence. After adjusting for age, gender, first language and Part A performance, ethnicity (non-white vs white, OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.71), Part B passing score (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.00) and number of attempts at Part B (two or more attempts vs one attempt, OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.94) were found to be independent predictors of an unsatisfactory ARCP outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to identify predictors of ARCP outcomes during higher surgical specialty training in the UK and provides further evidence of the predictive validity of the MRCS examination.

Factors predicting success in the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination: a summary for OMFS

The Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS, parts A and B) is a mandatory examination for entry into higher surgical training in the UK. We investigated which factors predict success in both the written (Part A) and clinical (Part B) parts of the examination, and provide a summary for oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMFS). All UK graduates who attempted both parts between 2007 and 2016 were included. There was a positive correlation between the scores in parts A and B (r=0.41, p<0.01). For Part A, men (odds ratio (OR) 2.78; 95% CI 1.83 to 4.19), white candidates (OR 1.70; 95% CI 1.52 to 1.89), and younger graduates (under 29years of age), were more likely to pass (OR 2.60; 95% CI 1.81 to 3.63). Foundation year one (FY1) doctors had higher pass rates than all other grades (e.g. core surgical trainee 2 compared with FY1 OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.77). The number of attempts at Part A and the final score, as well as ethnicity and stage of training, were independent predictors of success in Part B. Candidates who did well in Part A were more likely to do well in Part B. Several independent predictors of success were identified, but only the stage of training and ethnicity were common predictors in both parts. Higher scores obtained by younger candidates might be relevant to OMFS trainees who take Part A after studying medicine as a second degree.

Impact of performance in a mandatory postgraduate surgical examination on selection into specialty training

Background

The Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination is undertaken by large numbers of trainees in the UK and internationally as a mandatory step within surgical training. Unlike some high-stakes medical examinations, the MRCS is yet to be validated. A quantitative study was undertaken to assess its predictive validity by investigating the relationship between MRCS (Parts A and B) and national selection interview scores for general and vascular surgery in the UK.

Methods

Pearson correlation coefficients were used to examine the linear relationship between each assessment, and linear regression analyses were employed to identify potential independent predictors of the national selection score. All UK medical graduates who attempted the interview in 2011-2015 were included.

Results

Some 84·4 per cent of the candidates (1231 of 1458) were matched with MRCS data. There was a significant positive correlation between the first attempt score at Part B of the MRCS examination and the national selection score (r = 0·38, P < 0·001). In multivariable analysis, 17 per cent of variance in the national selection first attempt score was explained by the Part B MRCS score and number of attempts (change in R ² value of 0·10 and 0·07 respectively; P < 0·001). Candidates who required more than two attempts at Part B were predicted to score 8·1 per cent less than equally matched candidates who passed at their first attempt.

Conclusion

This study supports validity of the MRCS examination, and indicates its predictive value regarding entry into specialist training.