Objective To prospectively assess the construct and criterion validity of ClassIntra version 1.0, a newly developed classification for assessing intraoperative adverse events. Design International, multicentre cohort study. Setting 18 secondary and tertiary centres from 12 countries in Europe, Oceania, and North America. Participants The cohort study included a representative sample of 2520 patients in hospital having any type of surgery, followed up until discharge. A follow-up to assess mortality at 30 days was performed in 2372 patients (94%). A survey was sent to a representative sample of 163 surgeons and anaesthetists from participating centres. Main outcome measures Intraoperative complications were assessed according to ClassIntra. Postoperative complications were assessed daily until discharge from hospital with the Clavien-Dindo classification. The primary endpoint was construct validity by investigating the risk adjusted association between the most severe intraoperative and postoperative complications, measured in a multivariable hierarchical proportional odds model. For criterion validity, inter-rater reliability was evaluated in a survey of 10 fictitious case scenarios describing intraoperative complications. Results Of 2520 patients enrolled, 610 (24%) experienced at least one intraoperative adverse event and 838 (33%) at least one postoperative complication. Multivariable analysis showed a gradual increase in risk for a more severe postoperative complication with increasing grade of ClassIntra: ClassIntra grade I versus grade 0, odds ratio 0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.69 to 1.42); grade II versus grade 0, 1.39 (0.97 to 2.00); grade III versus grade 0, 2.62 (1.31 to 5.26); and grade IV versus grade 0, 3.81 (1.19 to 12.2). ClassIntra showed high criterion validity with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.59 to 0.91) in the survey (response rate 83%). Conclusions ClassIntra is the first prospectively validated classification for assessing intraoperative adverse events in a standardised way, linking them to postoperative complications with the well established Clavien-Dindo classification. ClassIntra can be incorporated into routine practice in perioperative surgical safety checklists, or used as a monitoring and outcome reporting tool for different surgical disciplines. Future studies should investigate whether the tool is useful to stratify patients to the appropriate postoperative care, to enhance the quality of surgical interventions, and to improve long term outcomes of surgical patients. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03009929 .

Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is commonly performed, and several factors increase the

​ObjectivesEmergency abdominal surgery (EAS) refers to high-risk intra-abdominal surgical procedures undertaken for acute gastrointestinal pathology. The relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and mortality of patients undergoing EAS is poorly understood. This study examined this relationship at the national level.​DesignThis is a national population-based study using a full administrative inpatient dataset (National Quality Assurance Improvement System) from publicly funded hospitals in Ireland.​Setting24 public hospitals providing EAS services.​Participants and InterventionsPatients undergoing EAS as identified by primary procedure codes during the period 2014–2018.​Main outcome measuresThe main outcome measure was adjusted in-hospital mortality following EAS in publicly funded Irish hospitals. Mortality rates were adjusted for sex, age, admission source, Charlson Comorbidity Index, procedure complexity, organ system and primary diagnosis. Differences in overall, 7-day and 30-day in-hospital mortality for hospitals with low (<250), medium (250–449) and high (450+) volume and surgical teams with low (<30), medium (30–59) and high (60+) volume during the study period were also estimated.​ResultsThe study included 10 344 EAS episodes. 798 in-hospital deaths occurred, giving an overall in-hospital mortality rate of 77 per 1000 episodes. There was no statistically significant difference in adjusted mortality rate between low and high volume hospitals. Low volume surgical teams had a higher adjusted mortality rate (85.4 deaths/1000 episodes) compared with high volume teams (54.7 deaths/1000 episodes), a difference that persisted among low volume surgeons practising in high volume hospitals.​ConclusionPatients undergoing EAS managed by high volume surgeons have better survival outcomes. These findings contribute to the ongoing discussion regarding configuration of emergency surgery services and emphasise the need for effective clinical governance regarding observed variation in outcomes within and between institutions.

Background COVID-19 has had a global impact on all aspects of healthcare including surgical training. This study aimed to quantify the impact of COVID-19 on operative case numbers recorded by surgeons in training, and annual review of competency progression (ARCP) outcomes in the UK. Methods Anonymized operative logbook numbers were collated from electronic logbook and ARCP outcome data from the Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme database for trainees in the 10 surgical specialty training specialties. Operative logbook numbers and awarded ARCP outcomes were compared between predefined dates. Effect sizes are reported as incident rate ratios (IRR) with 95 per cent confidence intervals. Results Some 5599 surgical trainees in 2019, and 5310 in surgical specialty training in 2020 were included. The IRR was reduced across all specialties as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic (0.62; 95 per cent c.i. 0.60 to 0.64). Elective surgery (0.53; 95 per cent c.i. 0.50 to 0.56) was affected more than emergency surgery (0.85; 95 per cent c.i. 0.84 to 0.87). Regional variation indicating reduced operative activity was demonstrated across all specialties. More than 1 in 8 trainees in the final year of training have had their training extended and more than a quarter of trainees entering their final year of training are behind their expected training trajectory. Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic has had a major effect on surgical training in the UK. Urgent, coordinated action is required to minimize the impacts from the reduction in training in 2020.

In patients with severe acute pancreatitis (AP), enteral nutrition is delivered by nasojejunal (NJ) tube to minimise pancreatic stimulation. Nasogastric (NG) feeding represents an alternative route. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of NG feeding. Secondary objectives were to compare the NG and NJ routes and assess the side effects of the former. The primary endpoint was exclusive NG feeding with delivery of 75 % of nutritional targets. Additional outcomes included change to total parenteral nutrition (TPN), increased pain or disease severity, vomiting, diarrhoea, delivery rate reduction and tube displacement. Among the retrieved studies, six were found to be eligible for the qualitative review and four for the meta-analysis. NG nutrition was received by 147 patients; exclusive NG feeding was achieved in 90 % (133/147). Of the 147 patients, 129 (87 %) received 75 % of the target energy. In studies where all subjects received exclusive NG nutrition, 82 % (seventy-four of the ninety patients) received . 75 % of the intended energy. Compared with NJ nutrition, there was no significant difference in the delivery of 75 % of nutritional targets (pooled risk ratio (RR) 1·02; 95 % CI 0·75, 1·38.) or no increased risk of change to TPN (pooled RR 1·05; 95 % CI 0·45, 2·48), diarrhoea (pooled RR 1·28; 95 % CI 0·62, 2·66), exacerbation of pain (pooled RR 1·10; 95 % CI 0·47, 2·61) or tube displacement (pooled RR 0·44; 95 % CI 0·11, 1·73). Vomiting and diarrhoea were the most common side effects of NG feeding (13·3 and 12·9 %, respectively). With respect to the delivery of nutrition, 11·2 % of the patients required delivery rate reduction and 3·4 % dislodged the tube. Other side effects included elevated levels of aspirates (9·1 %), abdominal distension (1·5 %), pain exacerbation (7·5 %) and increased disease severity (1·6 %). In conclusion, NG feeding is efficacious in 90 % of patients. Further research is required to optimise the delivery of NG nutrition and examine 'gut-rousing' approaches to nutrition in patients with severe AP.

No abstract

No abstract

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant changes to healthcare systems which impact the delivery of surgical training. This study aimed to investigate the qualitative impact of COVID-19 on surgical training in the United Kingdom (UK) & Republic of Ireland (ROI) Methods This national, collaborative, cross-sectional study involving 13 surgical trainee associations distributed a pan-surgical specialty questionnaire on the impact of COVID-19 on surgical training over 4 weeks in May 2020. Various aspects of training were assessed. Results 810 completed responses were analysed (males=401, females=390) from all deaneries and training grades. The perceived negative overall impact of the pandemic on surgical training experience was significant. (Weighted average = 8.66). 41% of respondents (n=301) were redeployed with 74% redeployed >4 weeks. Complete loss of training was reported in elective operating (69.5%), outpatient activity (67.3%) and endoscopy (69.5%). A reduction of >50% was reported in emergency operating (48%) and completion of work-based assessments (WBAs) (46%). 3.3% (n= 17) of respondents reported plans to leave medicine altogether. Cancellations in study leave and regional teaching programmes without rescheduling were reported in 72% and 60% of the cohort respectively. Elective operative exposure and WBAs completion were the primary reported factors affecting potential trainee progression. Only 9% reported that they would definitely meet all required competencies. Conclusion COVID-19 has had a negative impact on surgical training across all grades and specialties, with implications for trainee progression, recruitment and retention of the surgical workforce. Further investigation of the long-term impact at a national level is required.