Background: Gender equity remains to be realized in academic plastic and reconstructive surgery. The purpose of this study was to measure the proportion of women in leadership roles in academic plastic and reconstructive surgery to verify where gender gaps may persist. Methods: Six markers of leadership were analyzed: academic faculty rank, manuscript authorship, program directorship, journal editor-in-chief positions, society board of directors membership, and professional society membership. Descriptive statistics were performed, and chi-square tests were used to compare categorical variables. Results: About 16 percent to 19 percent of practicing plastic surgeons are female, as measured by the percentage of female faculty and American Society of Plastic Surgeons members. Female plastic surgeons comprised 18.9 percent (n = 178) of the faculty from 88 academic plastic surgery institutions, and represented 9.9 percent of full professors and 10.8 percent of chiefs. Nineteen institutions had no female faculty. Women were first authors in 23.4 percent of publications and senior author in 14.7 percent of publications. No journal studied had a female editor-in-chief. Of the examined plastic and reconstructive societies, the proportion of women on the board of directors ranged from 16.7 percent to 23.5 percent. Conclusions:The proportion of female program directors, first manuscript authors, and board members of certain societies is commensurate with the number of women in the field, suggesting an evolving landscape within the specialty. However, women remain underrepresented in many other leadership roles, heralding the work that remains to ensure gender parity exists for those pursuing leadership roles in the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery. (Plast.

Background The impact of public health policy to reduce the spread of COVID-19 on access to surgical care is poorly defined. We aim to quantify the surgical backlog during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Brazilian public health system and determine the relationship between state-level policy response and the degree of state-level delays in public surgical care. Methods Monthly estimates of surgical procedures performed per state from January 2016 to December 2020 were obtained from Brazil's Unified Health System Informatics Department. Forecasting models using historical surgical volume data before March 2020 (first reported COVID-19 case) were constructed to predict expected monthly operations from March through December 2020. Total, emergency, and elective surgical monthly backlogs were calculated by comparing reported volume to forecasted volume. Linear mixed effects models were used to model the relationship between public surgical delivery and two measures of health policy response: the COVID-19 Stringency Index (SI) and the Containment & Health Index (CHI) by state. Findings Between March and December 2020, the total surgical backlog included 1,119,433 (95% Confidence Interval 762,663–1,523,995) total operations, 161,321 (95%CI 37,468–395,478) emergent operations, and 928,758 (95%CI 675,202–1,208,769) elective operations. Increased SI and CHI scores were associated with reductions in emergent surgical delays but increases in elective surgical backlogs. The maximum government stringency (score = 100) reduced emergency delays to nearly zero but tripled the elective surgical backlog. Interpretation Strong health policy efforts to contain COVID-19 ensure minimal reductions in delivery of emergent surgery, but dramatically increase elective backlogs. Additional coordinated government efforts will be necessary to specifically address the increased elective backlogs that accompany stringent responses.

Introduction: Several models for predicting mortality have been developed for patients with burns, and the most commonly used are based on age and total body surface area (TBSA%). They often show good predictive precision as depicted by high values for area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). However the effect of coexisting morbidity on such prediction models has not to our knowledge been thoroughly examined. We hypothesised that adding it to a previously published model (based on age, TBSA%, full thickness burns, gender, and need for mechanical ventilation) would further improve its predictive power. Methods: We studied 772 patients admitted during the period 1997-2008 to the Linkoping University Hospital, National Burn Centre with any type of burns. We defined coexisting morbidity as any of the medical conditions listed in the Charlson list, as well as psychiatric disorders or drug or alcohol misuse. We added coexisting medical conditions to the model for predicting mortality (age, TBSA%, and need for mechanical ventilation) to determine whether it improved the model as assessed by changes in deviances between the models. Results: Mean (SD) age and TBSA% was 35 (26) years and 13 (17) %, respectively. Among 725 patients who survived, 105 (14%) had one or more coexisting condition, compared with 28 (60%) among those 47 who died. The presence of coexisting conditions increased with age (p < 0.001) among patients with burns. The AUC of the mortality prediction model in this study, based on the variables age, TBSA%, and need for mechanical ventilation was 0.980 (n = 772); after inclusion of coexisting morbidity in the model, the AUC improved only marginally, to 0.986. The model was not significantly better either. Conclusion: Adding coexisting morbidity to a model for prediction of mortality after a burn based on age, TBSA%, and the need for mechanical ventilation did not significantly improve its predictive value. This is probably because coexisting morbidity is automatically adjusted for by age in the original model. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Plastic surgery varies in scope, especially in different settings. This study aimed to quantify the plastic surgery workforce in low-income countries (LICs), understand commonly treated conditions by plastic surgeons working in these settings, and assess the impact on reducing global disease burden. Methods: We queried national and international surgery societies, plastic surgery societies, and non-governmental organizations to identify surgeons living and working in LICs who provide plastic surgical care using a cross-sectional survey. Respondents reported practice setting, training experience, income sources, and perceived barriers to care. Surgeons ranked commonly treated conditions and reported which of the Disease Control Priorities-3 essential surgery procedures they perform. Results: An estimated 63 surgeons who consider themselves plastic surgeons were identified from 15 LICs, with no surgeons identified in the remaining 16 LICs. Responses were obtained from 43 surgeons (70.5%). The 3 most commonly reported conditions treated were burns, trauma, and cleft deformities. Of the 44 “Essential Surgical Package'' procedures, 37 were performed by respondents, with the most common being skin graft (73% of surgeons performing), cleft lip/palate repair (66%), and amputations/escharotomy (61%). The most commonly cited barrier to care was insufficient equipment. Only 9% and 5% of surgeons believed that there are enough plastic surgeons to handle the burden in their local region and country, respectively. Conclusions: Plastic surgery plays a significant role in the coverage of essential surgical conditions in LICs. Continued expansion of the plastic surgical workforce and accompanying infrastructure is critical to meet unmet surgical burden in low- and middle-income countries.

No abstract

No abstract