BackgroundThe European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) is a surgical society who promotes the development and expansion of minimally invasive surgery to surgeons and surgical trainees. It does so through its activities in education, training, and research. The EAES research committee aims to promote the highest quality clinical research in endoscopic and minimally invasive surgery. They have provided grant funding since 2009 in education, surgery, and basic science. Despite the success and longevity of the scheme, the academic and non-academic impact of the research funding scheme has not been evaluated.AimsThe primary aim of this project is to assess the short, long term academic and real world impact of the EAES funding scheme. The secondary aims are to identify barriers and facilitators for achieving good impact.MethodsThis will be a mixed qualitative and quantitative study. Semi-structured interviews will be performed with previous grant recipients. The questions for the interviews will be selected after a consensus is achieved amongst the members of the steering committee of this project. The responses will be transcribed and thematic analysis will be applied. The results of the thematic analysis will be used to populate a questionnaire which will be disseminated to grant recipients. This study is kindly funded by the EAES.DiscussionThe first question this project is expected to answer is whether the EAES research funding scheme had a significant positive impact on research output, career progression but also non-academic output such as change in clinical guidelines, healthcare quality and cost-effectiveness improvement. This project however is also expected to identify facilitators and barriers to successful completion of projects and to achieving high impact. This will inform EAES and the rest of the surgical and academic communities as to how clinicians would like to be supported when conducting research. There should also be a positive and decisive change towards removing factors that hinder the timely and successful completion of projects.

Defunctioning stomas (ileostomy and colostomy) may be used prior to commencement of neoadjuvant therapy in patients with locally advanced colon or rectal cancer, in order to prevent clinical large bowel obstruction caused by radiotherapy associated oedema or progression of disease in patients who are not obstructed. However, the exact rate of clinical obstruction in patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy who do not receive a defunctioning stoma is not known. Furthermore, it is not clear which factors predispose patients to developing clinical large bowel obstruction. Given that defunctioning stomas are associated with post operative and intra-operative risks, it is not currently possible to tailor defunctioning stomas to patients who have the greatest risk of developing obstruction. This systematic review which is in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement (PRISMA), aims to define the role of defunctioning stomas in prevention of obstruction patients with locally advanced colon or rectal cancer while undergoing neoadjuvant therapy. Two researchers will perform the literature search which will include all published and “in process” articles published in the English language between 2002–2022 in the following databases: EMBASE (OVID), MEDLINE (EBSCO), CINHAL complete, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, Clinical Trials Registry. The full text of the selected articles will be independently screened by two researchers against the inclusion criteria. Data will be extracted from each article regarding: study design, participants, type of intervention and outcomes. The effect size will be expressed in incidence rates and when appropriate in relative risk with 95% confidence intervals. If possible, we will perform a meta-analysis. Heterogeneity will be assessed using I2 statistics. We will pool the data extracted from the randomised controlled trials to perform a meta-analysis using the Review Manager 5 software (RevMan 5). The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system will be used to assess the certainty of the evidence.