No abstract

Background: Peer assessment has been demonstrated to be an effective educational intervention for health science students. Aims: This study aims to give an overview of all instruments or questionnaires for peer assessments used in medical and allied health professional educational settings and their psychometric characteristics as described in literature. Methods: A systematic literature search was carried out using the electronic databases Pubmed, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO and Web of Science, including all available inclusion dates up to May 2010. Results: Out of 2899 hits, 28 studies were included, describing 22 different instruments for peer assessment in mainly medical educational settings. Although most studies considered professional behaviour as a main subject of assessment and described peer assessment usually as an assessment tool, great diversity was found in educational settings and application of peer assessment, dimensions or constructs as well as number of items and scoring system per questionnaire, and in psychometric characteristics. Conclusions: Although quite a few instruments of peer assessment have been identified, many questionnaires did not provide sufficient psychometric data. Still, the final choice of an instrument for educational purposes can only be justified by its sufficient reliability and validity as well as the discriminative and evaluative purposes of the assessment.

Objective:To compare the surgical outcomes of the Minimally Invasive Ponto Surgery (MIPS) technique with those of the linear incision technique with soft-tissue preservation for bone-anchored hearing systems (BAHS).Design:Sponsor-initiated multicenter, open, randomized, controlled clinical trial.Setting:Maastricht University Medical Centre, Ziekenhuisgroep Twente and Medisch Centrum Leeuwarden, all situated in The Netherlands.Participants:Sixty-four adult patients eligible for unilateral BAHS surgery.Interventions Single-stage BAHS surgery with 1:1 randomization to the linear incision technique with soft-tissue preservation (control) or the MIPS (test) group.Primary and Secondary Outcome Measurements:Primary objective: compare the incidence of inflammation (Holgers Index ≥ 2) during 12 weeks’ follow-up after surgery. Secondary objectives: skin dehiscence, pain scores, loss of sensibility around the implant, soft-tissue overgrowth, skin sagging, implant extrusion, cosmetic results, surgical time, wound healing and Implant Stability Quotient measurements.Results:Sixty-three subjects were analyzed in the intention-to-treat population. No significant difference was found for the incidence of inflammation between groups. Loss of skin sensibility, cosmetic outcomes, skin sagging, and surgical time were significantly better in the test group. No statistically significant differences were found for dehiscence, pain, and soft-tissue overgrowth. A nonsignificant difference in extrusion was found for the test group. The Implant Stability Quotient was statistically influenced by the surgical technique, abutment length, and time.Conclusion:No significant differences between the MIPS and the linear incision techniques were observed regarding skin inflammation. MIPS results in a statistically significant reduction in the loss of skin sensibility, less skin sagging, improved cosmetic results, and reduced surgical time. Although nonsignificant, the implant extrusion rate warrants further research.

Hoarseness and vocal cord injuries are clinically relevant complications related to short-term general anesthesia using an endotracheal tube or laryngeal mask. However, more well-designed prospective studies are necessary to generate reliable data as well as to investigate techniques to reduce adverse laryngeal effects. For future research, a proposal to categorize the vocal cord lesions due to general anesthesia is presented. Furthermore, use of a preoperative and postoperative standardized measurement protocol using acoustic analysis and the Voice Handicap Index is advised.