Notesdata:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eb108/eb108e1225c6a34726896a3a71243e18df6f7721" alt="what is notes.io? What is notes.io?"
![]() ![]() Notes - notes.io |
CONCLUSION These further investigations have yielded a better understanding of the MAS shunt, its position, structure and function. This can be of crucial importance to reconstructive surgeons when raising the DIEP flap. In the UK the BAPRAS (British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons) meetings have always represented the ideal platform for disseminating new information in the field of plastic surgery. Previous studies have suggested the publication rate for these meetings has been falling. Our aim was to re-assess the conversion rates of presented abstracts to publications. All abstracts from BAPRAS meetings between Winter 2014 and Summer 2016 were included. PubMed and Google Scholar databases were used to search for full publications. A database was collated, this included; time to publication, journal of publication and impact factor of journal. A total of 500 abstracts were presented during the study period for which the publication rate was 28.4%. The average time to publication was 16.8 months. The most common publication journal was the Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery (JPRAS) (34%). Free papers were published in journals with significantly greater impact factors (p = 0.046). Publication rates were similar to previous literature for BAPRAS meetings and have increased since 2007. A continued downward trend of publication rates for BAPRAS meetings is not seen in our data. A reduction in the number of publications in JPRAS may be explained by a rise in the impact factor of the journal or increasing competitiveness for publications. When variations in methodology are accounted for publication rates are similar to other specialties. In order to continually assess the quality of papers presented at BAPRAS meetings, the conversion to publication should be regularly re-audited. BACKGROUND Shared decision-making is a key component of patient-centered care and has been shown to improve patient satisfaction and quality of life. Herein, we study the impact of a standardized patient education class for prospective breast reconstruction patients on clinic efficiency, access to care, and perception on shared decision-making. METHODS The number of new patient consultations per clinic, as well as average duration of the first individual clinic encounter, was compared before and after the introduction of a standardized education class given by the senior author to all new breast reconstruction patients. To evaluate patients' perception of shared decision-making, the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q9) and the Satisfaction with Information scale of the BREAST-Q Reconstruction Module were electronically distributed among the patients and compared between the two groups. RESULTS Introduction of the patient education class was associated with a significant reduction in the duration of new patient encounters compared to historic controls (31.8 min vs. 53.5 min, p less then 0.01) along with permitting a 43% increase in new patient visits. No differences in self-perceived patient education and autonomy were seen between class participants and historic controls in the SDM-Q9 scores (p = 0.58) and BREAST-Q scores (p = 0.14). CONCLUSION The introducing a standardized patient education class translated into a significant reduction in the duration of individual new patient encounters, thereby increasing patient access to care, while maintaining high-quality standards of self-perceived patient education and shared decision-making. BACKGROUND The practice of tracking and analyzing surgical outcomes is essential to becoming better surgeons. However, this feedback system is largely absent in residency training programs. Thus, we developed a Surgery Report Card (SRC) for residents performing tissue expander (TE)-based breast reconstruction and report our initial experience with its implementation. METHODS We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for TE-based breast reconstructions and compared outcomes to our retrospective cohort. The primary outcome was overall complications. The SRC compares patient and complication statistics for resident-led teams to the meta-analysis. RESULTS The meta-analysis included 12 studies, with 2093 patients (2982 breasts) that underwent TE-based reconstruction. The pooled complication rate was 26.9%; infection was most common (8.3%); failure rate was 5.9%. Our cohort included 144 patients (245 breasts) among 13 resident-led teams. Overall complication rate was 31.8%; infections were most frequent (17.6%) and failure rate was 7.3%. Our cohort had significantly higher BMIs (29.7 vs 25.4, p less then 0.0001) more diabetics (6.9% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.02), and more patients receiving adjuvant radiation therapy (41.4 vs 26.3%, p less then 0.0001). Every 3 months, residents receive a customized SRC of their cases, with the meta-analysis used as a benchmark. A survey demonstrated the SRC made residents reconsider surgical technique and more conscientious surgeons, and would like it implemented for other procedures during residency. CONCLUSIONS The implementation of our SRC for TE-based breast reconstruction establishes a baseline for surgical performance comparison for residents, demonstrates that residents can safely perform the procedure, and allows for critiquing of surgical techniques to improve patient care. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Rhinoplasty is a frequently performed surgical procedure. Besides an aesthetically successful outcome, determination of additional nasal pathologies and making a simultaneous intervention on these are also essential for a successful functional outcome. This study aims to determine the rates of accompanying nasal pathologies in patients undergoing rhinoplasty and reveals whether any additional interventions were performed during operation. MATERIALS AND METHODS In this cross-sectional study, 496 Caucasian Turkish patients who underwent rhinoplasty at the Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery and Otorhinolaryngology clinics of our research hospital between 2015 and 2018 were retrospectively examined. Among them, the results of 271 patients who had preoperative paranasal computerized tomography scans were evaluated. RESULTS The mean age of the 271 patients was 28.8 years (Range 17-55). Among them, 156 (57%) were female and 115 (42%) were male. selleck chemicals The numbers of patients with septal deviation, inferior concha hypertrophy, unilateral/bilateral concha bullosa, nasal polyp, mucosal thickening, and retention cysts at the Otorhinolaryngology clinic were found to be 126 (82%), 77 (50%), 20 (13%), 10 (6.
Here's my website: https://www.selleckchem.com/products/nt157.html
![]() |
Notes is a web-based application for online taking notes. You can take your notes and share with others people. If you like taking long notes, notes.io is designed for you. To date, over 8,000,000,000+ notes created and continuing...
With notes.io;
- * You can take a note from anywhere and any device with internet connection.
- * You can share the notes in social platforms (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, instagram etc.).
- * You can quickly share your contents without website, blog and e-mail.
- * You don't need to create any Account to share a note. As you wish you can use quick, easy and best shortened notes with sms, websites, e-mail, or messaging services (WhatsApp, iMessage, Telegram, Signal).
- * Notes.io has fabulous infrastructure design for a short link and allows you to share the note as an easy and understandable link.
Fast: Notes.io is built for speed and performance. You can take a notes quickly and browse your archive.
Easy: Notes.io doesn’t require installation. Just write and share note!
Short: Notes.io’s url just 8 character. You’ll get shorten link of your note when you want to share. (Ex: notes.io/q )
Free: Notes.io works for 14 years and has been free since the day it was started.
You immediately create your first note and start sharing with the ones you wish. If you want to contact us, you can use the following communication channels;
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: http://twitter.com/notesio
Instagram: http://instagram.com/notes.io
Facebook: http://facebook.com/notesio
Regards;
Notes.io Team