Introduction Burnout is becoming an increasingly recognised phenomenon within the medical profession. This study aims to investigate the presence of burnout amongst neurosurgical trainees in the UK and Ireland as well as investigating potential exacerbating and protective factors. Method An online survey was sent to all neurosurgical trainees in the UK and Ireland via the British Neurosurgical Trainees’ Association (BNTA) mailing list. Responding participants anonymously completed the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) and answered questions about known risk factors for burnout including workplace environment, workplace bullying, time spent on leisure activities and sleep and reported likelihood of leaving neurosurgery. We also collated data on responders’ demographics. We compared CBI scores for participants with and without risk factors to determine correlation with CBI. Results There were 75 respondents (response rate 42%) from a range of ages and all training grades, 72% of whom were male. The median CBI score was 38.85 (IQR 17.76). Participants showed a higher degree of personal and workplace burnout (median CBIs of 47.02, IQR 25.00; and 49.14, IQR 19.64, respectively) compared with patient-related burnout (median CBI 18.67, IQR 25.00). Participants with the following self-reported risk factors were significantly more likely to have higher CBIs: workplace bullying (p = 0.01), getting on less well with colleagues (p < 0.05), working longer hours (p < 0.05) and insufficient sleep, exercise and leisure time (all p < 0.01). Those with higher CBI scores were more likely to consider leaving neurosurgical training (p = 0.01). Conclusion We identified a high burnout incidence in a cohort representative of UK neurosurgical trainees, although our results may have been skewed somewhat by selection bias. We determined potential risk factors for burnout related to specific workplace stressors and time for non-work activities. In the future, changes to training curricula should address these issues, aiming to improve training, enhance patient care and reduce attrition rates.

OBJECTIVE Suboptimal lead placement is one of the most common indications for deep brain stimulation (DBS) revision procedures. Confirming lead placement in relation to the visible anatomical target with dedicated stereotactic imaging before terminating the procedure can mitigate this risk. In this study, the authors examined the accuracy, precision, and safety of intraoperative MRI (iMRI) to both guide and verify lead placement during frame-based stereotactic surgery. METHODS A retrospective analysis of 650 consecutive DBS procedures for targeting accuracy, precision, and perioperative complications was performed. Frame-based lead placement took place in an operating room equipped with an MRI machine using stereotactic images to verify lead placement before removing the stereotactic frame. Immediate lead relocation was performed when necessary. Systematic analysis of the targeting error was calculated. RESULTS Verification of 1201 DBS leads with stereotactic MRI was performed in 643 procedures and with stereotactic CT in 7. The mean ± SD of the final targeting error was 0.9 ± 0.3 mm (range 0.1–2.3 mm). Anatomically acceptable lead placement was achieved with a single brain pass for 97% (n = 1164) of leads; immediate intraoperative relocation was performed in 37 leads (3%) to obtain satisfactory anatomical placement. General anesthesia was used in 91% (n = 593) of the procedures. Hemorrhage was noted after 4 procedures (0.6%); 3 patients (0.4% of procedures) presented with transient neurological symptoms, and 1 experienced delayed cognitive decline. Two bleeds coincided with immediate relocation (2 of 37 leads, 5.4%), which contrasts with hemorrhage in 2 (0.2%) of 1164 leads implanted on the first pass (p = 0.0058). Three patients had transient seizures in the postoperative period. The seizures coincided with hemorrhage in 2 of these patients and with immediate lead relocation in the other. There were 21 infections (3.2% of procedures, 1.5% in 3 months) leading to hardware removal. Delayed (> 3 months) retargeting of 6 leads (0.5%) in 4 patients (0.6% of procedures) was performed because of suboptimal stimulation benefit. There were no MRI-related complications, no permanent motor deficits, and no deaths. CONCLUSIONS To the authors’ knowledge, this is the largest series reporting the use of iMRI to guide and verify lead location during DBS surgery. It demonstrates a high level of accuracy, precision, and safety. Significantly higher hemorrhage was encountered when multiple brain passes were required for lead implantation, although none led to permanent deficit. Meticulous audit and calibration can improve precision and maximize safety.

Background: Patient selection for critical care admission must balance patient safety with optimal resource allocation. This study aimed to determine the relationship between critical care admission, and postoperative mortality after abdominal surgery. Methods: This prespecified secondary analysis of a multicentre, prospective, observational study included consecutive patients enrolled in the DISCOVER study from UK and Republic of Ireland undergoing major gastrointestinal and liver surgery between October and December 2014. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Multivariate logistic regression was used to explore associations between critical care admission (planned and unplanned) and mortality, and intercentre variation in critical care admission after emergency laparotomy. Results: Of 4529 patients included, 37.8% (n¼1713) underwent planned critical care admissions from theatre. Some 3.1% (n¼86/2816) admitted to ward-level care subsequently underwent unplanned critical care admission. Overall 30-day mortality was 2.9% (n¼133/4519), and the risk-adjusted association between 30-day mortality and critical care admission was higher in unplanned [odds ratio (OR): 8.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.51e19.97) than planned admissions (OR: 2.32, 95% CI: 1.43e3.85). Some 26.7% of patients (n¼1210/4529) underwent emergency laparotomies. After adjustment, 49.3% (95% CI: 46.8e51.9%, P<0.001) were predicted to have planned critical care admissions, with 7% (n¼10/145) of centres outside the 95% CI. Conclusions: After risk adjustment, no 30-day survival benefit was identified for either planned or unplanned postoperative admissions to critical care within this cohort. This likely represents appropriate admission of the highest-risk patients. Planned admissions in selected, intermediate-risk patients may present a strategy to mitigate the risk of unplanned admission. Substantial inter-centre variation exists in planned critical care admissions after emergency laparotomies.

No abstract