Core sepsis-related competencies for medical students: an international consensus by Delphi technique.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a life-threatening condition which may arise from infection in any organ system and requires early recognition and management. Healthcare professionals working in any specialty may need to manage patients with sepsis. Educating medical students about this condition may be an effective way to ensure all future doctors have sufficient ability to diagnose and treat septic patients. However, there is currently no consensus on what competencies medical students should achieve regarding sepsis recognition and treatment. This study aims to outline what sepsis-related competencies medical students should achieve by the end of their medical student training in both high or upper-middle incomes countries/regions and in low or lower-middle income countries/regions. METHODS: Two separate panels from high or upper-middle income and low or lower-middle income countries/regions participated in a Delphi method to suggest and rank sepsis competencies for medical students. Each panel consisted of 13-18 key stakeholders of medical education and doctors in specialties where sepsis is a common problem (both specialists and trainees). Panelists came from all continents, except Antarctica. RESULTS: The panels reached consensus on 38 essential sepsis competencies in low or lower-middle income countries/regions and 33 in high or upper-middle incomes countries/regions. These include competencies such as definition of sepsis and septic shock and urgency of antibiotic treatment. In the low or lower-middle income countries/regions group, consensus was also achieved for competencies ranked as very important, and was achieved in 4/5 competencies rated as moderately important. In the high or upper-middle incomes countries/regions group, consensus was achieved in 41/57 competencies rated as very important but only 6/11 competencies rated as moderately important. CONCLUSION: Medical schools should consider developing curricula to address essential competencies, as a minimum, but also consider addressing competencies rated as very or moderately important.

Use of double wire-guided technique and transpancreatic papillary septotomy in difficult ERCP: 4-year experience.

Background and aims: Post-ERCP complications increase with repeated attempts at cannulation. We evaluated several advanced biliary cannulation techniques applied when the standard approach fails. Methods: In total, 1873 consecutive patients underwent ERCP at our institution during the period 2010 - 2014. Guidewire-assisted (GA) cannulation with no contrast injection until deep biliary cannulation was considered the standard technique. Advanced techniques used were double wire-guided (DWG) cannulation, transpancreatic papillary septotomy (TPS), and needle-knife sphincterotomy (NKS). When GA cannulation failed, DWG cannulation was usually attempted first if the pancreatic duct (PD) wire was in place; if that failed, TPS or NKS was performed. Alternatively, TPS or NKS were performed alone. A prophylactic pancreatic stent was placed with repeated PD cannulation or PD contrast injection. During the last 2 years of review, indomethacin suppositories were given post-procedure to all patients who underwent advanced techniques. Results: The overall biliary cannulation success rate was 97 % (1823/1873). Advanced techniques were used in 12 % of ERCPs (230/1873), with 87 % (200/230) success rate. DWG was used alone or in combination with other techniques in 58 % (134/230) of advanced cases, with 68 % (91/134) success rate. Biliary cannulation was achieved in 96 % (91/95) of procedures when DWG was used alone, 76 % (26/34) with TPS alone, 80 % (37/46) for NKS alone, and 84 % (46/55) with multiple techniques. The overall rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis was 0.4 %, with all patients treated conservatively. Conclusion: In our experience at an urban tertiary care center, use of advanced techniques in difficult ERCP improved the overall success rate of biliary cannulation after standard technique failure without a significant increase in complication rate.