No abstract

No abstract

Background Little is known about the electronic collection and clinical feedback of patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) following surgical discharge. This systematic review summarized the evidence on the collection and uses of electronic systems to collect PROs after discharge from hospital after surgery. Method Systematic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Central were undertaken from database inception to July 2019 using terms for ‘patient reported outcomes’, ‘electronic’, ‘surgery’ and ‘at home’. Primary research of all study designs was included if they used electronic systems to collect PRO data in adults after hospital discharge following surgery. Data were collected on the settings, patient groups and specialties, ePRO systems (including features and functions), PRO data collected, and integration with health records. Results Fourteen studies were included from 9474 records, including two RCTs and six orthopaedic surgery studies. Most studies (9 of 14) used commercial ePRO systems. Six reported types of electronic device were used: tablets or other portable devices (3 studies), smartphones (2), combination of smartphones, tablets, portable devices and computers (1). Systems had limited features and functions such as real-time clinical feedback (6 studies) and messaging service for patients with care teams (3). No study described ePRO system integration with electronic health records to support clinical feedback. Conclusion There is limited reporting of ePRO systems in the surgical literature, and ePRO systems lack integration with hospital clinical systems. Future research should describe the ePRO system and ePRO questionnaires used, and challenges encountered during the study, to support efficient upscaling of ePRO systems using tried and tested approaches.

Introduction The incidence of Acute Aortic Syndrome (AAS) is rising. The Department of Health is considering a supra regional tier of centralisation for complex aortic care. No standardised pathway exists to guide the transfer of patients with AAS, despite increasing evidence from coroners and the Healthcare Safety Investigation Board of delayed transfers and miscommunication costing lives. This study aims to deliver a pathway for the safe transfer of patients with suspected AAS to a specialist aortic centre through multidisciplinary Delphi consensus. Methods The researchers will create an interdisciplinary Steering Group to oversee the study, which will identify appropriate stakeholders for inclusion in the Delphi process. A systematic review will be performed to summarise existing evidence and highlight gaps in knowledge where consensus is required. The Steering Group will create, circulate and interpret the Delphi questionnaire. The outcomes will also enable determination of criteria for audit that should become the standard for ensuring a safe and efficient process for patient transfer to a complex aortic centre. Results Results will provide inter-disciplinary guidance to healthcare professionals for early management and transfer of patients with suspected AAS, and prevent unnecessary transfer, thereby improving outcomes, ensuring equity of access to specialist aortic care for patients. Results will also provide audit standards through which future improvements can be realised. Conclusion This study is reliant upon collaboration between multidisciplinary healthcare providers, qualitative researchers and patients. Its success will streamline emergency pathways in the management of AAS, saving lives and resources, with inbuilt mechanisms for continuous review and improvement.

Introduction Worldwide, there is no specific medical school curriculum in neurosurgery despite a high burden of neurosurgical disease that is often assessed, investigated and managed by generalists. This scoping review was carried out to map available evidence pertaining to the provision of neurosurgery education in the medical school curriculum across the world. Method This review was conducted in accordance to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews. Results Ten studies were included. Six were from the United Kingdom, two from the United States, and one each from Canada and Ireland. Two studies evaluated perceptions of both medical students and practicing clinicians, five studies evaluated the perceptions of medical students and three studies reported perceptions of clinicians only. Three main themes were identified. Neurosurgery was perceived as an important part of the general medical student curriculum. Exposure to neurosurgery teaching was varied but when received, deemed useful and students were keen to receive more. Interest in a neurosurgical career amongst medical students was high. Conclusions There is a lack of a specialty-specific medical school curriculum and variability of medical students’ exposure to neurosurgery teaching exists. Our findings highlight the need to systematically assess specialty-specific teaching and determine adequacy.