ESDE-MIE fellowship: a descriptive analysis of the first experiences.

Esophageal resection is a high-risk and technically demanding procedure, with a long proficiency-gain curve. The European Society Diseases of the Esophagus (ESDE)-Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (MIE) training program was launched in 2018 for European surgeons willing to train and to begin a career undertaking MIE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the first experience of the ESDE-MIE fellowship and relate this to the initially predetermined core principles and objectives of the program. Between October 2021 and May 2022, the participating fellows, in collaboration with the ESDE Educational Committee, initiated a survey to assess the outcome and experience of these fellowships. Data from each individual fellowship were analysed and reported in a descriptive manner. Between 2018 and 2022, in total, five fellows have completed the ESDE-MIE fellowship program. Despite the COVID-19 outbreak just the year after its launch, predetermined clinical and research goals were achieved in all cases. Each of the fellows were able to assist in a median of 40 (IQR 27-69) MIE and/or Robot assisted (RA)MIE procedures, of a total median of 115 (IQR 83-123) attended Upper GI cases. After the fellowship, MIE has been fully adopted by the fellows who returned to their home institutions as Upper GI surgeons. The fellowship was concluded by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) Multidisciplinary Joint Committee (MJC) certification in Upper GI Surgery, which was successfully obtained by all who took part. Based on the experience of the first five fellows, the ESDE-MIE training fellowship meets with the expected needs even despite the COVID-19 outbreak in 2019. Furthermore, these fellows have returned home and integrated MIE into their independent surgical practice, affirming the ability of this program to train the next generation of MIE surgeons, even in the most challenging of circumstances.

Surgical challenges and research priorities in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic: EAES membership survey.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems and general surgeons are being challenged by the current pandemic. The European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) aimed to evaluate surgeons' experiences and perspectives, to identify gaps in knowledge, to record shortcomings in resources and to register research priorities. METHODS: An ad hoc web-based survey of EAES members and affiliates was developed by the EAES Research Committee. The questionnaire consisted of 69 items divided into the following sections: (Ι) demographics, (II) institutional burdens and management strategies, and (III) analysis of resource, knowledge, and evidence gaps. Descriptive statistics were summarized as frequencies, medians, ranges,, and interquartile ranges, as appropriate. RESULTS: The survey took place between March 25th and April 16th with a total of 550 surgeons from 79 countries. Eighty-one percent had to postpone elective cases or suspend their practice and 35% assumed roles not related to their primary expertise. One-fourth of respondents reported having encountered abdominal pathologies in COVID-19-positive patients, most frequently acute appendicitis (47% of respondents). The effect of protective measures in surgical or endoscopic procedures on infected patients, the effect of endoscopic surgery on infected patients, and the infectivity of positive patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery were prioritized as knowledge gaps and research priorities. CONCLUSIONS: Perspectives and priorities of EAES members in the era of the pandemic are hereto summarized. Research evidence is urgently needed to effectively respond to challenges arisen from the pandemic.

Dispositional optimism and all-cause mortality after esophageal cancer surgery: a nationwide population-based cohort study.

PURPOSE: To examine the association between dispositional optimism and all-cause mortality after esophageal cancer surgery and whether pathological tumor stage and the COVID-19 pandemic modified this association. METHODS: This nationwide, population-based prospective cohort study included 335 patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery in Sweden between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2019. Dispositional optimism was measured 1 year post-surgery using Life Orientation Test-Revised (LOT-R). A higher LOT-R sum score represents higher dispositional optimism. Mortality information was obtained from the Swedish Register of the Total Population. All patients were followed up until death or until December 31, 2020, whichever occurred first. Cox regression with adjustments for confounders was used. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 20.8 months, during which 125 (37.3%) patients died. Among the included 335 patients, 219 (65.4%) patients had tumor pathologically staged Tis-II, and 300 (89.6%) patients entered the cohort before the COVID-19 pandemic. Both tumor stage and the COVID-19 pandemic were effect modifiers. For each unit increase in LOT-R sum score, the risk of all-cause mortality decreased by 11% (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98) among patients with tumor staged Tis-II before the COVID-19 pandemic. This association was non-significant in patients with tumor staged III-IV (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.07) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.25). CONCLUSION: Assessing dispositional optimism may help predict postoperative survival, especially for patients with early and intermediate esophageal cancer. Increasing dispositional optimism might be a potential intervention target to improve survival after esophageal cancer surgery.

Misinformation About the Human Gut Microbiome in YouTube Videos: Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Social media platforms such as YouTube are integral tools for disseminating information about health and wellness to the public. However, anecdotal reports have cited that the human gut microbiome has been a particular focus of dubious, misleading, and, on occasion, harmful media content. Despite these claims, there have been no published studies investigating this phenomenon within popular social media platforms. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to (1) evaluate the accuracy and reliability of the content in YouTube videos related to the human gut microbiome and (2) investigate the correlation between content engagement metrics and video quality, as defined by validated criteria. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, videos about the human gut microbiome were searched for on the United Kingdom version of YouTube on September 20, 2021. The 600 most-viewed videos were extracted and screened for relevance. The contents and characteristics of the videos were extracted and independently rated using the DISCERN quality criteria by 2 researchers. RESULTS: Overall, 319 videos accounting for 62,354,628 views were included. Of the 319 videos, 73.4% (n=234) were produced in North America and 78.7% (n=251) were uploaded between 2019 and 2021. A total of 41.1% (131/319) of videos were produced by nonprofit organizations. Of the videos, 16.3% (52/319) included an advertisement for a product or promoted a health-related intervention for financial purposes. Videos by nonmedical education creators had the highest total and preferred viewership. Daily viewership was the highest for videos by internet media sources. The average DISCERN and Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct scores were 49.5 (SE 0.68) out of 80 and 5.05 (SE 2.52) out of 8, respectively. DISCERN scores for videos by medical professionals (mean 53.2, SE 0.17) were significantly higher than for videos by independent content creators (mean 39.1, SE 5.58; P<.001). Videos including promotional materials had significantly lower DISCERN scores than videos without any advertisements or product promotion (P<.001). There was no correlation between DISCERN scores and total viewership, daily viewership, or preferred viewership (number of likes). CONCLUSIONS: The overall quality and reliability of information about the human gut microbiome on YouTube is generally poor. Moreover, there was no correlation between the quality of a video and the level of public engagement. The significant disconnect between reliable sources of information and the public suggests that there is an immediate need for cross-sector initiatives to safeguard vulnerable viewers from the potentially harmful effects of misinformation.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Emergency Adult Surgical Patients and Surgical Services: An International Multi-center Cohort Study and Department Survey.

OBJECTIVES: The PREDICT study aimed to determine how the COVID-19 pandemic affected surgical services and surgical patients and to identify predictors of outcomes in this cohort. BACKGROUND: High mortality rates were reported for surgical patients with COVID-19 in the early stages of the pandemic. However, the indirect impact of the pandemic on this cohort is not understood, and risk predictors are yet to be identified. METHODS: PREDICT is an international longitudinal cohort study comprising surgical patients presenting to hospital between March and August 2020, conducted alongside a survey of staff redeployment and departmental restructuring. A subgroup analysis of 3176 adult emergency patients, recruited by 55 teams across 18 countries is presented. RESULTS: Among adult emergency surgical patients, all-cause in-hospital mortality (IHM) was 3.6%, compared to 15.5% for those with COVID-19. However, only 14.1% received a COVID-19 test on admission in March, increasing to 76.5% by July.Higher Clinical Frailty Scale scores (CFS >7 aOR 18.87), ASA grade above 2 (aOR 4.29), and COVID-19 infection (aOR 5.12) were independently associated with significantly increased IHM.The peak months of the first wave were independently associated with significantly higher IHM (March aOR 4.34; April aOR 4.25; May aOR 3.97), compared to non-peak months.During the study, UK operating theatre capacity decreased by a mean of 63.6% with a concomitant 27.3% reduction in surgical staffing. CONCLUSION: The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted surgical patients, both directly through co-morbid infection and indirectly as shown by increasing mortality in peak months, irrespective of COVID-19 status.Higher CFS scores and ASA grades strongly predict outcomes in surgical patients and are an important risk assessment tool during the pandemic.

The Reliability and Quality of YouTube Videos as a Source of Public Health Information Regarding COVID-19 Vaccination: Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Recent emergency authorization and rollout of COVID-19 vaccines by regulatory bodies has generated global attention. As the most popular video-sharing platform globally, YouTube is a potent medium for the dissemination of key public health information. Understanding the nature of available content regarding COVID-19 vaccination on this widely used platform is of substantial public health interest. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and quality of information on COVID-19 vaccination in YouTube videos. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, the phrases "coronavirus vaccine" and "COVID-19 vaccine" were searched on the UK version of YouTube on December 10, 2020. The 200 most viewed videos of each search were extracted and screened for relevance and English language. Video content and characteristics were extracted and independently rated against Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct and DISCERN quality criteria for consumer health information by 2 authors. RESULTS: Forty-eight videos, with a combined total view count of 30,100,561, were included in the analysis. Topics addressed comprised the following: vaccine science (n=18, 58%), vaccine trials (n=28, 58%), side effects (n=23, 48%), efficacy (n=17, 35%), and manufacturing (n=8, 17%). Ten (21%) videos encouraged continued public health measures. Only 2 (4.2%) videos made nonfactual claims. The content of 47 (98%) videos was scored to have low (n=27, 56%) or moderate (n=20, 42%) adherence to Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct principles. Median overall DISCERN score per channel type ranged from 40.3 (IQR 34.8-47.0) to 64.3 (IQR 58.5-66.3). Educational channels produced by both medical and nonmedical professionals achieved significantly higher DISCERN scores than those of other categories. The highest median DISCERN scores were achieved by educational videos produced by medical professionals (64.3, IQR 58.5-66.3) and the lowest median scores by independent users (18, IQR 18-20). CONCLUSIONS: The overall quality and reliability of information on COVID-19 vaccines on YouTube remains poor. Videos produced by educational channels, especially by medical professionals, were higher in quality and reliability than those produced by other sources, including health-related organizations. Collaboration between health-related organizations and established medical and educational YouTube content producers provides an opportunity for the dissemination of high-quality information on COVID-19 vaccination. Such collaboration holds potential as a rapidly implementable public health intervention aiming to engage a wide audience and increase public vaccination awareness and knowledge.

Using a Secure, Continually Updating, Web Source Processing Pipeline to Support the Real-Time Data Synthesis and Analysis of Scientific Literature: Development and Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: The scale and quality of the global scientific response to the COVID-19 pandemic have unquestionably saved lives. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has also triggered an unprecedented "infodemic"; the velocity and volume of data production have overwhelmed many key stakeholders such as clinicians and policy makers, as they have been unable to process structured and unstructured data for evidence-based decision making. Solutions that aim to alleviate this data synthesis-related challenge are unable to capture heterogeneous web data in real time for the production of concomitant answers and are not based on the high-quality information in responses to a free-text query. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this project is to build a generic, real-time, continuously updating curation platform that can support the data synthesis and analysis of a scientific literature framework. Our secondary objective is to validate this platform and the curation methodology for COVID-19-related medical literature by expanding the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset via the addition of new, unstructured data. METHODS: To create an infrastructure that addresses our objectives, the PanSurg Collaborative at Imperial College London has developed a unique data pipeline based on a web crawler extraction methodology. This data pipeline uses a novel curation methodology that adopts a human-in-the-loop approach for the characterization of quality, relevance, and key evidence across a range of scientific literature sources. RESULTS: REDASA (Realtime Data Synthesis and Analysis) is now one of the world's largest and most up-to-date sources of COVID-19-related evidence; it consists of 104,000 documents. By capturing curators' critical appraisal methodologies through the discrete labeling and rating of information, REDASA rapidly developed a foundational, pooled, data science data set of over 1400 articles in under 2 weeks. These articles provide COVID-19-related information and represent around 10% of all papers about COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: This data set can act as ground truth for the future implementation of a live, automated systematic review. The three benefits of REDASA's design are as follows: (1) it adopts a user-friendly, human-in-the-loop methodology by embedding an efficient, user-friendly curation platform into a natural language processing search engine; (2) it provides a curated data set in the JavaScript Object Notation format for experienced academic reviewers' critical appraisal choices and decision-making methodologies; and (3) due to the wide scope and depth of its web crawling method, REDASA has already captured one of the world's largest COVID-19-related data corpora for searches and curation.

Determinants of burnout and other aspects of psychological well-being in healthcare workers during the Covid-19 pandemic: A multinational cross-sectional study.

The Covid-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented pressure on healthcare systems and workers around the world. Such pressures may impact on working conditions, psychological wellbeing and perception of safety. In spite of this, no study has assessed the relationship between safety attitudes and psychological outcomes. Moreover, only limited studies have examined the relationship between personal characteristics and psychological outcomes during Covid-19. From 22nd March 2020 to 18th June 2020, healthcare workers from the United Kingdom, Poland, and Singapore were invited to participate using a self-administered questionnaire comprising the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ), Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) to evaluate safety culture, burnout and anxiety/depression. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine predictors of burnout, anxiety and depression. Of 3,537 healthcare workers who participated in the study, 2,364 (67%) screened positive for burnout, 701 (20%) for anxiety, and 389 (11%) for depression. Significant predictors of burnout included patient-facing roles: doctor (OR 2.10; 95% CI 1.49-2.95), nurse (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.04-1.84), and 'other clinical' (OR 2.02; 95% CI 1.45-2.82); being redeployed (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.02-1.58), bottom quartile SAQ score (OR 2.43; 95% CI 1.98-2.99), anxiety (OR 4.87; 95% CI 3.92-6.06) and depression (OR 4.06; 95% CI 3.04-5.42). Significant factors inversely correlated with burnout included being tested for SARS-CoV-2 (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.51-0.82) and top quartile SAQ score (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.22-0.40). Significant factors associated with anxiety and depression, included burnout, gender, safety attitudes and job role. Our findings demonstrate a significant burden of burnout, anxiety, and depression amongst healthcare workers. A strong association was seen between SARS-CoV-2 testing, safety attitudes, gender, job role, redeployment and psychological state. These findings highlight the importance of targeted support services for at risk groups and proactive SARS-CoV-2 testing of healthcare workers.

A national survey assessing public readiness for digital health strategies against COVID-19 within the United Kingdom.

There is concern that digital public health initiatives used in the management of COVID-19 may marginalise certain population groups. There is an overlap between the demographics of groups at risk of digital exclusion (older, lower social grade, low educational attainment and ethnic minorities) and those who are vulnerable to poorer health outcomes from SARS-CoV-2. In this national survey study (n = 2040), we assessed how the UK population; particularly these overlapping groups, reported their preparedness for digital health strategies. We report, with respect to using digital information to make health decisions, that those over 60 are less comfortable (net comfort: 57%) than those between 18 and 39 (net comfort: 78%) and lower social grades are less comfortable (net comfort: 63%) than higher social grades (net comfort: 75%). With respect to a preference for digital over non-digital sources in seeking COVID-19 health information, those over 60 (net preference: 21%) are less inclined than those between 18 and 39 (net preference: 60%) and those of low educational attainment (net preference: 30%) are less inclined than those of high educational attainment (net preference: 52%). Lastly, with respect to distinguishing reliable digital COVID-19 information, lower social grades (net confidence: 55%) are less confident than higher social grades (net confidence: 68%) and those of low educational attainment (net confidence: 51%) are less confident than those of high educational attainment (net confidence: 71%). All reported differences are statistically significant (p < 0.01) following multivariate regression modelling. This study suggests that digital public health approaches to COVID-19 have the potential to marginalise groups who are concurrently at risk of digital exclusion and poor health outcomes from SARS-CoV-2.

New geographic model of care to manage the post-COVID-19 elective surgery aftershock in England: a retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVES: The suspension of elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic is unprecedented and has resulted in record volumes of patients waiting for operations. Novel approaches that maximise capacity and efficiency of surgical care are urgently required. This study applies Markov multiscale community detection (MMCD), an unsupervised graph-based clustering framework, to identify new surgical care models based on pooled waiting-lists delivered across an expanded network of surgical providers. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study using Hospital Episode Statistics. SETTING: Public and private hospitals providing surgical care to National Health Service (NHS) patients in England. PARTICIPANTS: All adult patients resident in England undergoing NHS-funded planned surgical procedures between 1 April 2017 and 31 March 2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The identification of the most common planned surgical procedures in England (high-volume procedures (HVP)) and proportion of low, medium and high-risk patients undergoing each HVP. The mapping of hospitals providing surgical care onto optimised groupings based on patient usage data. RESULTS: A total of 7 811 891 planned operations were identified in 4 284 925 adults during the 1-year period of our study. The 28 most common surgical procedures accounted for a combined 3 907 474 operations (50.0% of the total). 2 412 613 (61.7%) of these most common procedures involved 'low risk' patients. Patients travelled an average of 11.3 km for these procedures. Based on the data, MMCD partitioned England into 45, 16 and 7 mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive natural surgical communities of increasing coarseness. The coarser partitions into 16 and seven surgical communities were shown to be associated with balanced supply and demand for surgical care within communities. CONCLUSIONS: Pooled waiting-lists for low-risk elective procedures and patients across integrated, expanded natural surgical community networks have the potential to increase efficiency by innovatively flexing existing supply to better match demand.

What Has Been the Impact of Covid-19 on Safety Culture? A Case Study from a Large Metropolitan Healthcare Trust.

Covid-19 has placed an unprecedented demand on healthcare systems worldwide. A positive safety culture is associated with improved patient safety and, in turn, with patient outcomes. To date, no study has evaluated the impact of Covid-19 on safety culture. The Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) was used to investigate safety culture at a large UK healthcare trust during Covid-19. Findings were compared with baseline data from 2017. Incident reporting from the year preceding the pandemic was also examined. SAQ scores of doctors and "other clinical staff", were relatively higher than the nursing group. During Covid-19, on univariate regression analysis, female gender, age 40-49 years, non-White ethnicity, and nursing job role were all associated with lower SAQ scores. Training and support for redeployment were associated with higher SAQ scores. On multivariate analysis, non-disclosed gender (-0.13), non-disclosed ethnicity (-0.11), nursing role (-0.15), and support (0.29) persisted to a level of significance. A significant decrease (p < 0.003) was seen in error reporting after the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. This is the first study to investigate SAQ during Covid-19. Differences in SAQ scores were observed during Covid-19 between professional groups when compared to baseline. Reductions in incident reporting were also seen. These changes may reflect perception of risk, changes in volume or nature of work. High-quality support for redeployed staff may be associated with improved safety perception during future pandemics.

Insights from a global snapshot of the change in elective colorectal practice due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: There is a need to understand the impact of COVID-19 on colorectal cancer care globally and determine drivers of variation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate COVID-19 impact on colorectal cancer services globally and identify predictors for behaviour change. DESIGN: An online survey of colorectal cancer service change globally in May and June 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Attending or consultant surgeons involved in the care of patients with colorectal cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in the delivery of diagnostics (diagnostic endoscopy), imaging for staging, therapeutics and surgical technique in the management of colorectal cancer. Predictors of change included increased hospital bed stress, critical care bed stress, mortality and world region. RESULTS: 191 responses were included from surgeons in 159 centers across 46 countries, demonstrating widespread service reduction with global variation. Diagnostic endoscopy was reduced in 93% of responses, even with low hospital stress and mortality; whilst rising critical care bed stress triggered complete cessation (p = 0.02). Availability of CT and MRI fell by 40-41%, with MRI significantly reduced with high hospital stress. Neoadjuvant therapy use in rectal cancer changed in 48% of responses, where centers which had ceased surgery increased its use (62 vs 30%, p = 0.04) as did those with extended delays to surgery (p<0.001). High hospital and critical care bed stresses were associated with surgeons forming more stomas (p<0.04), using more experienced operators (p<0.003) and decreased laparoscopy use (critical care bed stress only, p<0.001). Patients were also more actively prioritized for resection, with increased importance of co-morbidities and ICU need. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with severe restrictions in the availability of colorectal cancer services on a global scale, with significant variation in behaviours which cannot be fully accounted for by hospital burden or mortality.

The influence of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on esophagogastric cancer services: an international survey of esophagogastric surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Several guidelines to guide clinical practice among esophagogastric surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic were produced. However, none provide reflection of current service provision. This international survey aimed to clarify the changes observed in esophageal and gastric cancer management and surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: An online survey covering key areas for esophagogastric cancer services, including staging investigations and oncological and surgical therapy before and during (at two separate time-points-24th March 2020 and 18th April 2020) the COVID-19 pandemic were developed. RESULTS: A total of 234 respondents from 225 centers and 49 countries spanning six continents completed the first round of the online survey, of which 79% (n = 184) completed round 2. There was variation in the availability of staging investigations ranging from 26.5% for endoscopic ultrasound to 62.8% for spiral computed tomography scan. Definitive chemoradiotherapy was offered in 14.8% (adenocarcinoma) and 47.0% (squamous cell carcinoma) of respondents and significantly increased by almost three-fold and two-fold, respectively, in both round 1 and 2. There were uncertainty and heterogeneity surrounding prioritization of patients undergoing cancer resections. Of the surgeons symptomatic with COVID-19, only 40.2% (33/82) had routine access to COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction testing for staff. Of those who had testing available (n = 33), only 12.1% (4/33) had tested positive. CONCLUSIONS: These data highlight management challenges and several practice variations in caring for patients with esophagogastric cancers. Therefore, there is a need for clear consistent guidelines to be in place in the event of a further pandemic to ensure a standardized level of oncological care for patients with esophagogastric cancers.