ABSTRACT
Objective To demonstrate the degree of recommendation of mentors and mentees regarding a mentorship program, to assess the degree of satisfaction of the participants, and to describes the main characteristics of the meetings in pairs. Materials and Methods A primary, retrospective, analytical study based on answers to the annual evaluation questionnaires of the institutional mentorship program in pairs of the Orthopedics and Traumatology residency from December 2017 to February 2021. Results We compiled 52 responses from 26 mentorship preceptors and 26 mentored residents. The mentees and mentors had average ages of 27 (±1.5) years and 45 (±8.2) years respectively. A total of 96% of the participants recommend the program, and 89% of the mentees reported that the mentors contributed to their personal and professional decision-making process. Conclusion The mentorship program proved to be a highly recommended strategy in medical residency in Orthopedics. Data show that mentors contributed to the mentees' personal and professional decision-making process.
ABSTRACT
Abstract Objective To demonstrate the degree of recommendation of mentors and mentees regarding a mentorship program, to assess the degree of satisfaction of the participants, and to describes the main characteristics of the meetings in pairs. Materials and Methods A primary, retrospective, analytical study based on answers to the annual evaluation questionnaires of the institutional mentorship program in pairs of the Orthopedics and Traumatology residency from December 2017 to February 2021. Results We compiled 52 responses from 26 mentorship preceptors and 26 mentored residents. The mentees and mentors had average ages of 27 (±1.5) years and 45 (±8.2) years respectively. A total of 96% of the participants recommend the program, and 89% of the mentees reported that the mentors contributed to their personal and professional decision-making process. Conclusion The mentorship program proved to be a highly recommended strategy in medical residency in Orthopedics. Data show that mentors contributed to the mentees' personal and professional decision-making process.
Resumo Objetivo Demonstrar o grau de recomendação de mentores e mentorados quanto à participação em um programa de mentoria, avaliar o grau de satisfação dos participantes, e descrever as principais características das reuniões em dupla. Materiais e Métodos Estudo primário, retrospectivo, analítico, com análise das respostas dos questionários de avaliação anual do programa de mentoria em dupla da residência de Ortopedia e Traumatologia da instituição de dezembro de 2017 a fevereiro de 2021. Resultados Foram obtidas 52 respostas de 26 preceptores mentores e 26 residentes mentorados. A média de idade dos mentorados foi de 27 anos (±1,5 ano), ao passo que a média de idade dos mentores foi de 45 anos (±8,2 anos). O grau de recomendação do programa pelos participantes foi de 96%, e 89% dos mentorados consideraram que os mentores contribuíram para a tomada de decisões pessoais e profissionais. Conclusão O programa de mentoria se mostrou uma estratégia com alto grau de recomendação na residência médica em Ortopedia. Os dados mostram que os mentores contribuíram para a tomada de decisões pessoais e profissionais dos mentorados.
Subject(s)
Humans , Adult , Orthopedics/education , Traumatology/education , Mentors , Internship and ResidencyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/HYPOTHESIS: Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is a vital tool in the analysis of clinical results. It allows the determination of clinical relevance of statistical data. Our hypothesis was that specific differences between preoperative and postoperative scores would be able to accurately predict patient perception of improvement and satisfaction as reflected by anchor and distribution-based questions. METHODS: Retrospective cohort with patients that underwent rotator cuff repair. We evaluated the University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Rating Scale (UCLA) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Assessment Form (ASES) before and 12-months after surgery. Anchor-based, distribution-based and minimum detectable change (MDC) approaches were utilized. RESULTS: We evaluated 289 shoulders. The MCID for the UCLA scale was 4.5 points using the anchor method, 2.5 by the distribution method and 3.6 by MDC. Patients with a baseline score>20 presented a lower MCID (1.5, 1.1 and 1.7, respectively). For the ASES score, the MCID was 6.1 by the anchor method, 10.5 based on the distribution method and 26.3 by MDC. In the group of patients above the 60 point cutoff, the obtained values were 2.4, 4.9 and 13.6, respectively. CONCLUSION: The mean MCID value for the UCLA shoulder score is 3.5 points, ranging from 2.5 points (distribution method) to 4.5 points (anchor method). The mean MCID value for the ASES score was 15.2 points, ranging from 6.1 (anchor method) to 26.3 (MDC). Patients groups presenting with higher preoperative scores showed lower MCID values. This fact needs to be considered in postoperative comparisons between treatment groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Basic Science Study, Validation of Outcomes Instruments/Classification Systems.
Subject(s)
Minimal Clinically Important Difference , Rotator Cuff Injuries , Arthroscopy , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Rotator Cuff/surgery , Rotator Cuff Injuries/surgery , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Clindamycin has become an important antimicrobial option for the treatment of Staphylococcus aureus. However, little is known about the current patterns of clindamycin-susceptibility in S. aureus invasive isolates, both in our country and in other developing countries in the world. AIMS: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of constitutive and inducible clindamycin resistance in methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) blood culture isolates in São Paulo, Brazil. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From July 2011 to June 2012, all S. aureus isolates from blood cultures collected at our hospital were included in the study. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed according to recommendations of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. RESULTS: Total prevalence of clindamycin resistance was 68%, including 7.2% with inducible resistance. In MRSA resistance rate was 90.8% whereas in MSSA the rate was 32.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Our high prevalence of clindamycin resistance highlights the importance of performing D-test in a routine base, as well of maintaining continued surveillance for the prevalence of clindamycin resistance.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: After the dissemination of penicillin and oxacillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-intermediate and vancomycin resistant isolates have been reported. Even between isolates with minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) within the susceptible range, some authors have demonstrated that higher MICs correlate with higher lethality. METHODS: To test this hypothesis in our setting, we compared vancomycin MICs evaluated by two methods and clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with S. aureus bacteremia. RESULTS: We compared lethality in patients infected with isolates that had MICs under or over 2 mg/L. Among patients infected with isolates that had microdilution MICs <2 mg/L, the lethality was 25%; among patients infected with strains that had microdilution MICs ≥2 mg/L, 33% died. Among patients infected with isolates that had Etest MICs <2 mg/L, 23% died; in comparison, patients infected with strains that had Etest MICs ≥2 mg/L had a lethality of 44%. CONCLUSION: Our results showed a slight tendency of higher lethality when higher MICs were present. However, this difference did not reach statistical significance, possibly due to the relatively small number of patients included in the study. Future prospective studies are needed to further evaluate this correlation and to help clinicians guide antimicrobial therapy.
