The COVID-19 pandemic has led to unprecedented demands on healthcare with many requiring intubation. Tracheostomy insertion has often been delayed and the enduring effects of this on voice, swallow, and airway outcomes in COVID-19 tracheostomy patients are unknown. The aim of this study was to prospectively assess these outcomes in this patient cohort following hospital discharge.Methods: All COVID-19 patients who had undergone tracheostomy insertion, and were subsequently decannulated, were identified at our institution and followed up 2 months post-discharge. Patient-reported (PROMS) and clinician-reported outcome measures, endoscopic examination, and spirometry were used to assess voice, swallow, and airway outcomes.Results: Forty-one patients were included in the study with a mean age of 56 years and male:female ratio of 28:13. Average duration of endotracheal intubation was 24 days and 63.4% of tracheostomies were performed at day 21 to 35 of intubation. 53.7% had an abnormal GRBAS score and 30% reported abnormal swallow on EAT-10 questionnaire. 81.1% had normal endoscopic examination of the larynx, however, positive endoscopic findings correlated with the patient self-reported VHI-10 (P = .036) and EAT-10 scores (P = .027). 22.5% had spirometric evidence of fixed upper airway obstruction using the Expiratory-Disproportion Index (EDI) and Spearman correlation analysis showed a positive trend between abnormal endoscopic findings and EDI scores over 50 (P < .0001). Conclusion:The preliminary results of this study reveal a high incidence of laryngeal injury among patients who underwent intubation and tracheostomy insertion during the COVID-19 pandemic. As these patients continue to be followed up, the evolution of these complications will be studied.

BackgroundWe aimed to determine UK medical students’ perceptions and attitudes and interest toward medical leadership and clinician managers.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted during the academic year 2015–2016. An online questionnaire was distributed to 2,349 final-year students from 10 UK medical schools. Participants were asked to complete a 5-point Likert scale on their current perceptions, attitudes, and interest toward medical leadership and clinician managers. They were also asked to self-rate their leadership competences set by the Medical Leadership Competency Framework and to rate the quality of management and leadership training they received from their medical school.ResultsIn total, we received 114 complete responses. Only 7.9% of respondents were in agreement (strongly agree or agree) when asked whether they felt they were well informed about what a managerial position in medicine entails. When asked whether clinicians should influence managerial decisions within a clinical setting, 94.7% of respondents were in agreement with the statement. About 85% of respondents were in agreement that it is important for clinicians to have managerial or leadership responsibilities, with 63.2% of students in agreement that they would have liked more management or leadership training during medical school. Over half the respondents rated their management and leadership training they received during medical school as “very poor” or “poor” (54.4%).ConclusionOur study suggests that UK medical students have an appetite for management and leadership training and appreciate its importance but feel that the training they are receiving is poor. This suggests that there is a gap between the demand for management and leadership training and the quality of training supplied by UK medical schools.

Although the survival figures in this series are comparable with the best outcomes from other units, our experience would suggest improvements can still be achieved by reconsidering the selection of patients for neck dissection and temperomandibular joint excision in early stage disease. We also conclude that postoperative radiotherapy should be delivered to all patients, including surgical salvage cases who may have received previous irradiation. Finally, the minority of patients with poor prognostic features should be offered a more palliative therapeutic approach.

Background: Kv7.2 and Kv7.3 coassemble to form a heteromeric K ϩ channel that generates the M-current.

Sphenopalatine ganglion LAB with adrenaline carries relatively low risk of morbidity, but may improve the quality of the surgical field in terms of bleeding. However, there are limitations of the study due to heterogeneity of methods, quality and size of the studies. Well-conducted large RCTs are needed using standardised inclusion criteria, balanced baseline characteristics of cohorts, and validated subjective and objective outcome measures.

Objective Evidence for the management of acute otitis externa (AOE) is limited, with unclear diagnostic criteria and variably reported outcome measures that may not reflect key stakeholder priorities. We aimed to develop 1) a definition, 2) diagnostic criteria and 3) a core outcome set (COS) for AOE. Study design COS development according to Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) methodology and parallel consensus selection of diagnostic criteria/definition. Setting Stakeholders from the United Kingdom. Subjects and methods Comprehensive literature review identified candidate items for the COS, definition and diagnostic criteria. Nine individuals with past AOE generated further patient-centred candidate items. Candidate items were rated for importance by patient and professional (ENT doctors, general practitioners, microbiologists, nurses, audiologists) stakeholders in a three-round online Delphi exercise. Consensus items were grouped to form the COS, diagnostic criteria, and definition. Results Candidate COS items from patients (n = 28) and literature (n = 25) were deduplicated and amalgamated to a final candidate list (n = 46). Patients emphasised quality-of-life and the impact on daily activities/work. Via the Delphi process, stakeholders agreed on 31 candidate items. The final COS covered six outcomes: pain; disease severity; impact on quality-of-life and daily activities; patient satisfaction; treatment-related outcome; and microbiology. 14 candidate diagnostic criteria were identified, 8 reaching inclusion consensus. The final definition for AOE was ‘diffuse inflammation of the ear canal skin of less than 6 weeks duration’. Conclusion The development and adoption of a consensus definition, diagnostic criteria and a COS will help to standardise future research in AOE, facilitating meta-analysis. Consulting former patients throughout development highlighted deficiencies in the outcomes adopted previously, in particular concerning the impact of AOE on daily life.

IntroductionMale breast cancer is extremely rare with an incidence of less than 1% of all breast cancers. Literature reports a peak of incidence at roughly 71 years of age. Management currently follows the same clinical pathways as female breast cancer as a general rule.MethodsA retrospective search for all patients who were referred and diagnosed with male breast cancer at our centre was undertaken. Patients notes were then explored for demographics, histological staging, multidisciplinary team meeting outcome and treatment.A literature search including the search terms ‘Male Breast Cancer AND Surgery’ or ‘Male Breast Cancer AND Experience’ were used. Non English language articles, or those without abstracts were excluded.ResultsSeven patients were reviewed over 3 years (2006–2009). Mean agea was 69 years and mean lesion size was 15 mm. Histology was invasive ductal carcinoma for all patients. All patients were ER receptor positive. Two patients were HER2 positive. Five patients were offered mastectomy. One patient refused treatment. In follow up at 36 months there were 3 recurrences. 1 patient was lost to follow up. There were 3 mortalities.The literature search identified 72 articles. Articles were subdivided into those that discussed the surgical management of male breast cancer (n = 8), articles that discussed male breast cancer as podium presentations or posters with no full text article publication (n = 13) and finally full text publications of case experience of male breast cancer (n = 21).DiscussionWe report a series of seven cases of male breast cancer encountered over three years, evaluating patient demographics as well as treatment and outcomes. In our series patients were managed with mastectomy. New evidence is questioning the role of mastectomy against breast conserving surgery in male patients. Furthermore there is a lack of reporting infrastructure for national data capture of the benefits of surgical modalities. Literature review highlights the varied clinical experience between units that remains reported as podium presentation but not published. The establishment of an online international reporting registry would allow for efficient analysis of surgical outcomes to improve patient care from smaller single centres. This would facilitate large scale meta analysis by larger academic surgical centres.

COVIDTrach is a UK multidisciplinary collaborative project that aims to evaluate the outcomes of tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients. It also examines the implementation of national guidance in COVID-19 tracheostomies and the incidence of COVID-19 infections amongst those health care workers involved in the procedure. An invitation to participate in an online survey tool (REDCap) was disseminated to all UK NHS departments involved in tracheostomy in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients via the Federation of Surgical Specialty Associations, it's subsidiary organisations and the Intensive Care Society. To date 78 hospitals have submitted 564 COVID-19 tracheostomy cases. Fifty-two percent (n=219/465) of patients who had undergone tracheostomy and were still alive, had been successfully weaned from mechanical ventilation at the point of completing the survey. The all cause in-hospital mortality following tracheostomy was 12% (n=62/530), with 3% of these (n=2/62) due to tracheostomy related complications and the remaining deaths due to COVID-19 related complications. Amongst 400 cases submitting data two weeks after the tracheostomy, no instance of COVID-19 infection amongst operators was recorded. FFP3 masks or Powered Air Purifying Respirators were used by operators in 100% of tracheostomies and a face visor or hood with face shield was available in 99% of cases. This interim report highlights early outcomes following tracheostomy in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients. Future reporting from COVIDTrach will include more detailed analysis at later timepoints using comparator groups in order to provide a more comprehensive assessment of tracheostomy in COVID-19.