What is the current practice for managing patients with chronic limb-threatening ischaemia in vascular surgery services? A survey of UK vascular surgeons.

INTRODUCTION: The Vascular Society of Great Britain and Ireland (VSGBI) Peripheral Arterial Disease Quality Improvement Framework (PAD QIF) stipulates targets for managing patients with chronic limb-threatening ischaemia (CLTI); however, it is unknown whether these are achievable. This survey aims to evaluate contemporary practice for managing CLTI in the UK. METHODS: A questionnaire was developed in conjunction with the VSGBI to survey the management of CLTI and canvass opinions on the PAD QIF. The survey was distributed to all consultant members of the VSGBI and through a targeted social media campaign. RESULTS: Forty-seven consultant vascular surgeons based at 36 arterial centres across the UK responded (response rate from arterial centres = 46%). Only 14.3% of centres provided outpatient consultation within the target of seven days from referral, with only one centre providing revascularisation within the target of seven days from consultation. For inpatient management, 31.6% provided surgical and 23.8% endovascular revascularisation within the target of three days from assessment. While 60% of participants believe the PAD QIF's 5-day 'admitted care' pathway is achievable, only 28.6% thought the 14-day 'non-admitted care' pathway was feasible. Challenges to meeting these targets include the availability of theatre space and angiography lists, and availability of outpatient appointments for patient assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The opinion of UK vascular surgeons indicates that achieving the targets of the PAD QIF represents a major challenge based upon current services. Adapting existing services with a greater focus on providing an 'urgent' model of care may help to potentially overcome these challenges.

Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) crisis on surgical training: global survey and a proposed framework for recovery.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic had a profound impact on surgical services, potentially having a detrimental impact on training opportunities. The aim of this global survey was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on surgical training and to develop a framework for recovery. METHODS: A cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted. This was designed by a steering committee of medical educationalists and validated by a group of trainees before dissemination. RESULTS: A total of 608 responses were obtained from 34 countries and 15 specialties. The results demonstrated major disruption in all aspects of training. The impact was greatest for conferences (525 of 608) and hands-on courses (517 of 608), but less for inpatient care-related training (268 of 608). European trainees were significantly more likely to experience direct training disruption than trainees in Asia (odds ratio 0.15) or Australia (OR 0.10) (χ2 = 87.162, P < 0.001). Alternative training resources (webinars, 359 of 608; educational videos, 234 of 608) have emerged, although trainees expressed some dissatisfaction with them. The collective responses generated a four-pillar framework for training recovery that involved: guidance from training stakeholders with the involvement of trainees; prioritization of training, especially the roles of senior surgeons/trainers; provision of access to alternative/new teaching methods; and measures to address trainee anxiety. CONCLUSION: Training has been greatly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. The introduction of new teaching methods and a focus on training after the pandemic are imperative.