Summary Supraglottic airway devices are commonly used to manage the airway during general anaesthesia. There are sporadic case reports of temporomandibular joint dysfunction and dislocation following supraglottic airway device use. We conducted a prospective observational study of adult patients undergoing elective surgery where a supraglottic airway device was used as the primary airway device. Pre‐operatively, all participants were asked to complete a questionnaire involving 12 points adapted from the Temporomandibular Joint Scale and the Liverpool Oral Rehabilitation Questionnaire. Objective measurements included inter‐incisor distance as well as forward and lateral jaw movements. The primary outcome was the inter‐incisor distance, an accepted measure of temporomandibular joint mobility. Both the questionnaire and measurements were repeated in the postoperative period and we analysed data from 130 participants. Mean (SD) inter‐incisor distance in the pre‐ and postoperative period was 46.5 (7.2) mm and 46.3 (7.5) mm, respectively (p = 0.521) with a difference (95%CI) of 0.2 (−0.5 to 0.9) mm. Mean (SD) forward jaw movement in the pre‐ and postoperative period was 3.6 (2.4) mm and 3.9 (2.4) mm, respectively (p = 0.018). Mean (SD) lateral jaw movement to the right in the pre‐ and postoperative period was 8.9 (4.1) mm and 9.1 (4.0) mm, respectively (p = 0.314). Mean (SD) lateral jaw movement to the left in the pre‐ and postoperative period was 8.8 (4.0) mm and 9.3 (3.6) mm, respectively (p = 0.008). The number of patients who reported jaw clicks or pops before opening their mouth as wide as possible was 28 (21.5%) vs. 12 (9.2%) in the pre‐ and postoperative period, respectively (p < 0.001) with a difference (95%CI) of 12.3% (6.7–17.9%). There was no significant difference in the responses to the other 11 questions or in the number of patients who reported pain in the temporomandibular joint area postoperatively. No clinically significant dysfunction of the temporomandibular joint following the use of supraglottic airway devices in the postoperative period was identified by either patient questionnaires or objective measurements.

This book contains the abstracts of the papers presented at The 3rd Annual Graduate Entry Research in Medicine Conference (GERMCON 2020) Organized by Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick in collaboration with Swansea University Medical School, Swansea University, Wales, UK held on 12–18 October 2020. This was especially important for Graduate Entry Medical (GEM) students, who have less opportunity and time to engage in research due to their accelerated medical degree.

Over 15,000 transurethral resections of the prostate (TURP) are performed yearly in the UK. It is therefore vital that peri-operative care is optimised. Our centre favours the use of two-way catheters post-operatively without continuous bladder irrigation (CBI). Aim To evaluate our practice of using two-way catheters without irrigation post-TURP and to determine impact on patient care compared to standard three-way catheterization. Our primary outcome was duration of admission, but multiple secondary outcomes were also analysed. Method This was a prospective observational study. Every patient undergoing TURP at our centre from 2009 to 2019 was included. Prospective patient data were collected pertaining to peri-operative factors. This data was then compared with data published in the NICE guidance pertaining to TURP. Results 687 patients underwent TURP at our centre between 2009-2019. The average age of patients was 71.42 (±7.89). 87.17% (n = 598) had two-way catheters placed post-operatively. Average duration of admission was 1.61 (±1.35) days. TWOC was successful in 93.74% (n = 644). Complication rate was 8.73% (n = 60), reduced in comparison to other units. Furthermore, when compared to other centres, our method reduced lengths of admission and transfusion rates (1.6 days vs. 3.1 days and 0.87% vs. 2.83% respectively). Conclusions Our method preserves patient safety and is associated with reduced length of admission. It also has cost-saving benefits and a reduced post-operative period of catheterisation. We recommend this practice to the wider urological community.