Introduction Nasal fracture is a common form of ear, nose and throat (ENT) trauma with prompt referral required for assessment and potentially manipulation of nasal bones. The aetiology of nasal fracture is multifactorial, and injury occurs across all ages. Previous study has suggested a temporal relationship between nasal injury and major sporting events. Methods A total of 1966 adult patients with nasal injuries referred to emergency clinics across three London ENT centres between September 2016 and August 2019 were analysed. Results The majority of those referred were male (66.58%). Mean age at referral was 36.29±18.38 in males and 49.14±21.43 in females; 10.27% were 75 years and over. Incidence was highest during April–September 2018 (p=0.02). Mean incidence was higher in this period in the male 16–35 subgroup (p=0.039), with 53.1% of their injuries concentrated between Friday and Sunday. Conclusions Most nasal injuries occurred in young males. Mean age at referral was higher in females, and there was slightly increased incidence in over-75s, predominantly females. This incidence could be due to increased longevity or greater tendency to injury in females of this age. The injury patterns across the week also differed, with males injured proportionately more at the weekend. Nasal injury referrals of young men increased around the 2018 summer period, coinciding with the 2018 FIFA World Cup. This lends support to the association between major sporting events and the incidence of nasal injury, particularly in young males.

BackgroundMost evaluations of clinical leadership development programmes rely on self-assessments. Self-assessments are vulnerable to response-shift bias. Using retrospective then-tests may help to avoid this bias.In this study, we investigate whether post-programme then-tests (retrospective self-assessments) are more sensitive to change in clinical leadership development programme participants than traditional pre-programme pre-tests when paired with post-test self-assessments.Methods17 healthcare professionals participated in an 8-month single-centre multidisciplinary leadership development programme. Participants completed prospective pre-test, retrospective then-test and traditional post-test self-assessments using the Primary Colours Questionnaire (PCQ) and Medical Leadership Competency Framework Self-Assessment Tool (MLCFQ). Pre–post pairs and then–post pairs were analysed for changes using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and compared with a parallel multimethod evaluation organised by Kirkpatrick levels.ResultsA greater number of significant changes were detected using then-test pairs than pre-test pairs for both the PCQ (11 of 12 vs 4 of 12 items) and MLCFQ (7 of 7 vs 3 of 7 domains). The multimethods data showed positive outcomes at all Kirkpatrick levels.ConclusionsIn ideal circumstances, both pre-test and then-test evaluations should be conducted. We cautiously suggest that if only one post-programme evaluation can be conducted, then-tests may be appropriate means of detecting change.

Background: Biomedical scientists have become de facto leaders for their research teams. Theories of expert leadership suggest that the specialist knowledge and credibility these researcher-leaders bring to their roles can lead to improved performance. Formal leadership development for biomedical researchers remains uncommon, and it is unclear whether existing leadership development programmes achieve improved individual and organisational outcomes. Our study evaluates the effectiveness of a single centre leadership development programme for biomedical researchers using a mixed-methods approach. Methods: 26 biomedical researchers participated in an 8 month single centre multidisciplinary leadership development programme. Participants completed prospective pre-test, retrospective then-test and traditional post-test self-assessments using the Primary Colours Questionnaire (PCQ) and Medical Leadership Competency Framework Self-Assessment Tool (MLCFQ). Pre-post pairs and then-post pairs were analysed for changes using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and compared with a parallel mixed-methods evaluation organised by Kirkpatrick levels. Results: There were significant increases in 3/7 domains and 1/5 tasks of leadership in the PCQ, in both pre-post and then-post paired assessments. There were statistically significant but small increases in 2/7 domains of the MLCFQ. The mixed-methods data showed positive outcomes at all Kirkpatrick levels. Participants said the programme was relevant, interesting and well-organised, with 63% reporting increased confidence and motivation. Participants had a significant change in behaviour, spending 1-2 hours per week on group projects, which were successfully implemented locally. 42% of participants expected these projects to continue beyond the programme. Discussion: This study demonstrates a local leadership programme can have positive impact within a biomedical research centre despite time and financial constraints. We encourage future studies to utilise a mixed-methods approach to evaluating the impact of leadership development programmes.