Background Since the COVID-19 outbreak was declared a global pandemic, public health messages have emphasised the importance of frequent handwashing in limiting the transmission of the virus. Whilst crucial in controlling transmission, such messaging may have an adverse effect on individuals with OCD. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted, with a total of 332 participants recruited. Participants who scored above the optimal cut-off score on the Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory Revised edition (OCI-R) were included in the analysis (n = 254). Scores on the six subscales of the OCI-R were correlated with responses to a COVID-19 Impact measure. Results Factor analysis of the COVID-19 Impact measure revealed that items loaded on two components of the measure (handwashing and distress-avoidance). Canonical correlation analyses revealed significant associations between the OCI-R subscales and COVID-19 Impact measure, F (12, 490) = 8.14, p = 0.001, and the SHAI subscales with the COVID-19 Impact Measure, F (4, 498) = 8.18, p = 0.001). Specifically, washing and checking OCI-R subscales correlated with both components of the COVID-19 Impact measure, as did the health anxiety and beliefs SHAI subscales. Content analysis revealed disruption to treatment delivery and worsening symptom severity in participants with contamination-related OCD. Discussion Contamination and checking OCD subtypes have been associated with increased hand-washing behaviour and avoidance of distress-inducing cues. Consideration should be given to targeted support tailored to patients with these subtypes of OCD.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a well-established spinal operation for cervical disc degeneration disease with neurological compromise. The procedure involves an anterior approach to the cervical spine with discectomy to relieve the pressure on the impinged spinal cord to slow disease progression. The prosthetic cage replaces the disc and can be inserted stand-alone or with an anterior plate that provides additional stability. The literature demonstrates that the cage-alone (CA) is given preference over the cage-plate (CP) technique due to better clinical outcomes, reduced operation time and resultant morbidity. This retrospective case-controlled study compared CA versus CP fixation used in single and multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for myelopathy in a tertiary centre in Wales.A retrospective clinico-radiological analysis was undertaken, following ACDF procedures over seven years in a single tertiary centre. Inclusion criteria were patients over 18 years of age with cervical myelopathy who had at least six-month follow-up data. SPSS was used to identify any statistically significant difference between both groups. The data were analysed to evaluate the consistency of our findings in comparison to published literature.Eighty-six patients formed the study cohort; 28 [33%] underwent ACDF with CA and 58 [67%] with CP. The patient demographics were similar in both groups, and fusion was observed in all individuals. There was no statistical difference between the two constructs when assessing subsidence, clinical complication (dysphagia, dysphonia, infection), radiological parameters and reoperations. However, a more significant percentage [43% v 61%] of patients improved their cervical lordosis angle with CP treatment. Furthermore, the study yielded that surgery to upper cervical levels results in a higher incidence of dysphagia [65% v 35%]. Finally, bony growth across the cage was observed on X-ray in 12[43%] patients, a unique finding not mentioned in the literature previously.Our study demonstrates no overall difference between the two groups, and we recommend careful consideration of individual patient factors when deciding what construct to choose.

Introduction Conferences are an important avenue for dissemination of knowledge, research and provide networking opportunities for career development. The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted adoption of virtual platforms for delivery of these conferences. The aim of the study was to determine the utility and educational impact of a student-led virtual webinar to deliver an undergraduate cardiovascular conference compared to a traditional in-person conference. Methods We conducted a two-day virtual conference using the Zoom platform in June 2021. The conference consisted of cardiology subspecialty lectures, and workshops were conducted by a junior doctor, senior cardiology trainees and consultants. The conference also outlaid a virtual poster hall and oral presentation session while networking opportunities were encouraged using breakout rooms and poster hall chat function. A 38-item self-administered online questionnaire was designed and disseminated at the end of the conference to all attending delegates. All data analysis and data visualisation strategies were conducted on R statistical programming. Results Eight-hundred and forty students from 55 countries attended the event. Four hundred and ninety participants (58.5% response rate, 55.9% female) completed the questionnaire. Factors such as weekend conference (84.9%), student-led or organised (84.1%), environmental/sustainable (82.3%), appropriate level for me (81.5%) and comfort to present (80.8%) were deemed to be at least equal to traditional in-person conference. The conference also increased participants’ interest, their core cardiology knowledge and improved their critical analysis and basic echocardiography skills [median 4 (IQR 3–5) for all parameters]. Overall, participants also found it easy to use the virtual platform [median 5 (IQR 5–5)] and easier to ask questions compared to in-person conferences [median 5 (IQR 4–5) vs median 4 (IQR 3–5), p < 0.001]. Conclusion Our virtual conference provided opportunities to students that the COVID-19 pandemic would have otherwise affected; however, its utility and educational impact will need to be assessed within its individual context of delivery.

No abstract