A report on the state of bullying & harassment within plastic surgery in the United Kingdom.

Many surgical and medical groups in the UK and around the world have investigated the existing cultures within their own workplaces. The Australian college of surgeons, in 2015, conducted a survey that identified that bullying, harassment, sexual harassment and discrimination were endemic. Unsurprisingly this culture persists, and not only produces a workforce which underperforms but leads to continuous poor behaviour and substandard clinical outcomes for patients. PLASTA, in collaboration with BAPRAS, adopted the Royal College of Australian Surgeons survey (RACS) to sample our own plastic surgery community, at all grades. We present the results here and our suggestions for addressing these issues in the following editorial.

Why is priority setting important for global burn care research?

The use of robust evidence is a key component of providing high quality care to patients. Synthesised evidence to support clinical decision-making is lacking for many aspects of clinical burn care. Identifying the most important areas of care that lack high quality evidence and requires research is necessary, as funding for primary research is limited. Priority setting research studies are a joint endeavour between patients, carers and clinicians to identify and rank topics for research in a healthcare area in order to reduce research waste. Such an exercise has yet to be undertaken in burns. The aim of this paper is to outline the importance of research prioritisation in burn care, to discuss how it facilitates the maximum benefit from limited research funding and to explain the methodologies used.

A correlation analysis of metacarpal & phalangeal injury pattern from improvised explosive devices amongst armed force personnel.

Injuries to the hand during military combat operations, particularly from improvised explosive devices (IEDs) have a significant impact on form, function, mental health and future employment but remain underreported amidst the life and limb-threatening emergencies that garner more attention. An understanding the patterns of hand injuries encountered from IEDs is crucial to optimizing reconstruction and rehabilitation. The aim of this study was to re-evaluate hand injury sustained from IED in order to understand the clinical burden for reconstruction and direct the focus for future hand protection. We identified 484 hand injuries in 380 patients sustained as a result of IEDs among military personnel service in Afghanistan between 2006 and 2013. 53% of all surviving military personnel injured by IEDs sustain injuries to the hand. Analysis of the 103 patients who sustained injury to the metacarpal, phalanges or digital amputation revealed that the middle and ring fingers are most commonly injured. Amputation to the ring finger is strongly associated with injury to the adjacent fingers and amputations to the middle, ring and little fingers concurrently is a commonly observed pattern. The proximal phalanges of the middle and ring fingers had a strong correlation for fracture together. These findings disprove the conventional belief in an ulnar focus of injury and support the quest for a development of combat hand protection that addresses the injury pattern seen.

Comparing the surgical timelines of military and civilians traumatic lower limb amputations.

The care and challenges of injured service have been well documented in the literature from a variety of specialities. The aim of this study was to analyse the surgical timelines of military and civilian traumatic amputees and compare the surgical and resuscitative interventions. A retrospective review of patient notes was undertaken. Military patients were identified from the Joint Theatre Trauma Registry (JTTR) in 2009. Civilian patients were identified using the hospital informatics database. Patient demographics, treatment timelines as well as surgical and critical care interventions were reviewed. In total 71 military patients sustained traumatic amputations within this time period. This represented 11% of the total injury demographic in 2009. Excluding upper limb amputees 46 patients sustained lower extremity amputations. These were investigated further. In total 21 civilian patients were identified in a 7-year period. Analysis revealed there was a statistically significant difference between patient age, ITU length of stay, blood products used and number of surgical procedures between military and civilian traumatic amputees. This study identified that military patients were treated for longer in critical care and required more surgical interventions for their amputations. Despite this, their time to stump closure and length of stay were not statistically different compared to civilian patients. Such observations reflect the importance of an Orthoplastic approach, as well as daily surgical theatre co-ordination and weekly multi-disciplinary meetings in providing optimal care for these complex patients. This study reports the epidemiological observed differences between two lower limb trauma groups.