Conservative management of vestibular schwannomas of 15 to 31 mm intracranial diameter.

OBJECTIVE: To study the natural course of vestibular schwannomas 15 to 31 mm in diameter. METHODS: A retrospective study of 45 patients conservatively managed with interval scanning was performed. Outcome measures were: changes in tumour size, clinical features and hearing. A tumour was considered to be growing if it increased in size by more than 2 mm. RESULTS: Initial tumour sizes ranged from 15 to 31 mm, with a mean (± standard deviation) diameter of 20.1 ± 4.3 mm. The duration of follow up ranged from 6 months to 14 years (median, 3 years). Tumours grew in 11 cases (24.4 per cent), remained stable in 30 cases (66.7 per cent) and regressed in 4 cases (8.9 per cent). The overall mean tumour growth rate was 0.9 ± 2.2 mm per year; in growing tumours, it was 3.6 ± 2.9 mm per year. CONCLUSION: Outcomes were similar to those reported for smaller tumours. These findings suggest that patients with medium or moderately large tumours can be safely offered an initial period of conservative management before intervention is considered.

Working as a newly appointed consultant: a study into the transition from specialist registrar.

Practising for the first time as a consultant can be extremely challenging. This study explored the experiences of 45 physicians and surgeons who had made the transition from specialist registrar to hospital consultant.

Exploring the views of second-year Foundation Programme doctors and their educational supervisors during a deanery-wide pilot Foundation Programme.

AIM: To explore the views of second-year Foundation Programme doctors (F2s) and their educational supervisors taking part in a deanery-wide pilot Foundation Programme, in order to gain an understanding of their perceptions of the available learning experiences, support and supervision. METHODS: 20 semi-structured interviews were undertaken with randomly selected F2 doctors and educational supervisors participating in the deanery-wide pilot Foundation Programme. RESULTS: F2 trainees received appropriate and sufficient support and supervision from a variety of sources during their placements; however, it was believed that additional training of educational supervisors was required. Trainees reported some problems with the perception of the role of an F2; further understanding of the purpose and role of the F2 programme is required at trust level. The portfolio was viewed positively as a record and a learning tool, but was thought to be too bureaucratic. Trainees believed that it was more beneficial to their careers to take part in a foundation programme as opposed to a traditional senior house officer post, but both trainees and educational supervisors expressed some concerns about the generic nature of some skills F2s were expected to acquire. CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation has highlighted successful aspects of the Foundation Programme, particularly with regard to the level of support and range of experiences provided for trainees. Issues of concern to both trainees and educational supervisors have been identified, which require additional understanding.

The portfolio: how was it for you? Views of F2 doctors from the Mersey Deanery Foundation Pilot.

A study was conducted between August 2004 and August 2005 to explore the experiences of Foundation year 2 (F2) trainees who used the learning portfolio on the Mersey Deanery pilot scheme. Seventy-three trainees (77%) reported receiving their portfolio during their induction. In their first four-month placement, 90 trainees (96%) completed the two case-based discussions, 80 (87%) the three mini clinical examinations and 92 (97%) the two direct observation of practical procedures. The number of trainees who felt there was an opportunity to make a record of and analyse clinical critical incidents and critical incidents related to professional behaviour was only 32 (35%) and 13 (15%) respectively. Free text responses suggested that trainees appreciate the portfolio but that an understanding of its content and purpose, particularly by educational supervisors, is paramount to its success.

Clinical audit indicators of outcome following admission to hospital with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: The 1997 BTS/RCP national audit of acute chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in terms of process of care has previously been reported. This paper describes from the same cases the outcomes of death, readmission rates within 3 months of initial admission, and length of stay. Identification of the main pre-admission predictors of outcome may be used to control for confounding factors in population characteristics when comparing performance between units. METHODS: Data on 74 variables were collected retrospectively using an audit proforma from patients admitted to UK hospitals with acute COPD. Important prognostic variables for the three outcome measures were identified by relative risk and logistic regression was used to place these in order of predictive value. RESULTS: 1400 admissions from 38 acute hospitals were collated. 14% of cases died within 3 months of admission with variation between hospitals of 0-50%. Poor performance status, acidosis, and the presence of leg oedema were the best significant independent predictors of death. Age above 65, poor performance status, and lowest forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) tertile were the best predictors of length of stay (median 8 days). 34% of patients were readmitted (range 5-65%); lowest FEV(1) tertile, previous admission, and readmission with five or more medications were the best predictors for readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Important predictors of outcome have been identified and formal recording of these may assist in accounting for confounding patient characteristics when making comparisons between hospitals. There is still wide variation in outcome between hospitals that remains unexplained by these factors. While some of this variance may be explained by incomplete recording of data or patient factors as yet unidentified, it seems likely that deficiencies in the process of care previously identified are responsible for poor outcomes in some units.

Audit of acute admissions of COPD: standards of care and management in the hospital setting.

Despite publication of several management guidelines for COPD, relatively little is known about standards of care in clinical practice. Data were collected on the management of 1400 cases of acute admission with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in 38 UK hospitals to compare clinical practice against the recommended British Thoracic Society standards. Variation in the process of care between the different centres was analysed and a comparison of the management by respiratory specialists and nonrespiratory specialists made. There were large variations between centres for many of the variables studied. A forced expiratory volume in one second measurement was found in only 53% of cases. Of the investigations recommended in the acute management arterial blood gases were performed in 79% (interhospital range 40-100%) of admissions and oxygen was formally prescribed in only 64% (range 9-94%). Of those cases with acidosis and hypercapnia 35% had no further blood gas analysis and only 13% received ventilatory support. Long-term management was also deficient with 246 cases known to be severely hypoxic on admission yet two-thirds had no confirmation that oxygen levels had returned to levels above the requirements for long-term oxygen therapy. Only 30% of current smokers had cessation advice documented. To conclude, the median standards of care observed fell below those recommended by the guidelines. The lowest levels of performance were for patients not under the respiratory specialists, but specialists also have room for improvement. The substantial variation in the process of care between hospitals is strong evidence that it is possible for other centres with poorer performance to improve their levels of care.

National benchmarking as a support system for clinical governance.

Audit of the management of acute asthma in hospital has developed in tandem with guidelines produced and updated by the British Thoracic Society (BTS), on the principle that agreed guidelines combined with systematic review of practice by periodic audit are more likely to result in improvements in practice than guidelines alone. A short audit data set was distilled from previous experience with more elaborate tools and made available nationally to audit departments and through letters to consultant members of the BTS. Hospitals have been able to contribute since 1990. The data set reflects key items of the process of care: peak flow measured on admission and twice daily during the hospital stay; blood gases on admission; systemic corticosteroids as an inpatient; discharged with inhaled and oral corticosteroids; written self-management plans; follow-up arrangements. Data from 4,741 admissions over a seven year period are presented. The proportion of patients nationally receiving these items of asthma care is given. The median values for hospital performance improved significantly over the seven years, although there is potential for further improvement. If these data represent the national picture, they could form the basis upon which to set national standards for the care of patients with acute asthma in hospital. A further result of the developing audit has been the recognition of the value of external benchmarking in providing a context for the interpretation of local audit results. This audit system provides hospitals with a quick and easy method of obtaining an overview of local performance, with comparative national data for the same year. This has potential as a tool for clinical governance with much wider applicability, providing the data are handled carefully, particularly as the variability between hospitals diminishes over time.

Comparison of the process of care of acute severe asthma in adults admitted to hospital before and 1 yr after the publication of national guidelines.

This study set out to assess the effect of publication of the British Guidelines on Asthma Management on the processes and outcomes of the inpatient care of acute severe asthma in the U.K. A criterion-based audit of all acute asthma admissions during August and September 1990 (immediately before) and in 1991 (1 yr after publication of the Guidelines) using eight criteria of process and outcome was performed. Thirty-six teaching and district general hospitals in England, Scotland and Wales took part. In total, 766 patients admitted in 1990, and 900 patients admitted in 1991, were studied. The 1990 and 1991 cohorts were very similar demographically and had asthma of comparable severity. Respiratory physicians achieved similar high performance rates of between 75 and 91% for seven of the eight criteria for both years. Respiratory physicians were significantly more likely to provide patients with a written management plan in 1991. General physicians' performance was significantly lower in both years, but overall there was a very small, but just significant, improvement in their performance in 1991. Some hospitals performed consistently well in both years. It is concluded that respiratory physicians consistently provide better asthma care than general physicians. Though statistically significant, the small degree of improvement was disappointing. Possible reasons include: insufficient time for the Guidelines to be incorporated into practice; inaccessibility of the Guidelines to general physicians; failure to accept responsibility for implementing the good practice reflected in the Guidelines; and an explicit need for strategies to implement the Guidelines beyond publication in a widely-read general medical journal.

National audit of acute severe asthma in adults admitted to hospital. Standards of Care Committee, British Thoracic Society.

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the standard of care for hospital management of acute severe asthma in adults. DESIGN: Questionnaire based retrospective multicentre survey of case records. SETTING: 36 hospitals (12 teaching and 24 district general hospitals) across England, Wales, and Scotland. PATIENTS: All patients admitted with acute severe asthma between 1 August and 30 September 1990 immediately before publication of national guidelines for asthma management. MAIN MEASURES: Main recommendations of guidelines for hospital management of acute severe asthma as performed by respiratory and non-respiratory physicians. RESULTS: 766 patients (median age 41 (range 16-94) years) were studied; 465 (63%) were female and 448 (61%) had had previous admissions for asthma. Deficiencies were evident for each aspect of care studied, and respiratory physicians performed better than non-respiratory physicians. 429 (56%) patients had had their treatment increased in the two weeks preceding the admission but only 237 (31%) were prescribed oral steroids. Initially 661/766 (86%) patients had peak expiratory flow measured and recorded but only 534 (70%) ever had arterial blood gas tensions assessed. 65 (8%) patients received no steroid treatment in the first 24 hours after admission. Variability of peak expiratory flow was measured before discharge in 597/759 (78%) patients, of whom 334 (56%) achieved good control (variability < 25%). 47 (6%) patients were discharged without oral or inhaled steroids; 182/743 (24%) had no planned outpatient follow up and 114 failed to attend, leaving 447 (60%) seen in clinic within two months. Only 57/629 (8%) patients were recorded as having a written management plan. CONCLUSIONS: The hospital management of a significant minority of patients deviates from recommended national standards and some deviations are potentially serious. Overall, respiratory physicians provide significantly better care than non-respiratory physicians.