FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Investigation of divergent thinking among surgeons and surgeon trainees in Canada (IDEAS): a mixed-methods study

Por: Thabane · A. · McKechnie · T. · Arora · V. · Calic · G. · Busse · J. W. · Sonnadara · R. · Bhandari · M.
Objective

To assess the creative potential of surgeons and surgeon trainees, as measured by divergent thinking. The secondary objectives were to identify factors associated with divergent thinking, assess confidence in creative problem-solving and the perceived effect of surgical training on creative potential, and explore the value of creativity in surgery.

Design

We used a mixed-methods design, conducting a survey of divergent thinking ability using a validated questionnaire followed by two semi-structured interviews with top-scoring participants.

Participants & setting

Surgeons and surgeon trainees in the Department of Surgery at McMaster University.

Outcomes

The primary outcome was divergent thinking, assessed with the Abbreviated Torrance Test for Adults. Participants also self-assessed their confidence in creative problem-solving and the effect of surgical training on their creative potential. We performed descriptive analyses and multivariable linear regression to identify factors associated with divergent thinking. We conducted a thematic analysis of the interview responses.

Results

82 surgeons and surgeon trainees were surveyed; 43 were junior trainees and 28 were senior trainees. General surgery, orthopaedic surgery and plastic surgery represented 71.9% of the participants. The median participant age was 28 years (range 24–73), 51.2% of whom were female. Participants demonstrated levels of divergent thinking that were higher but not meaningfully different from the adult norm (62.39 (95% CI 61.25, 63.53), p

Conclusions

The divergent thinking ability among surgeons and surgeon trainees was not meaningfully different from the adult normative score; however, their ability to generate original ideas was below average.

Inflammatory markers in world trade center workers with asthma: Associations with post traumatic stress disorder

by Juan P. Wisnivesky, Nikita Agrawal, Jyoti Ankam, Adam Gonzalez, Alex Federman, Steven B. Markowitz, Janette M. Birmingham, Paula J. Busse

Background

Post-traumatic stress disorders (PTSD) is associated with worse asthma outcomes in individuals exposed to the World Trade Center (WTC) site.

Research question

Do WTC workers with coexisting PTSD and asthma have a specific inflammatory pattern that underlies the relationship with increased asthma morbidity?

Study design and methods

We collected data on a cohort of WTC workers with asthma recruited from the WTC Health Program. Diagnosis of PTSD was ascertained with a Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel of Mental Disorders) and the severity of PTSD symptoms was assessed with the PTSD Checklist 5. We obtained blood and sputum samples to measure cytokines levels in study participants.

Results

Of the 232 WTC workers with diagnosis of asthma in the study, 75 (32%) had PTSD. PTSD was significantly associated with worse asthma control (p = 0.002) and increased resource utilization (p = 0.0002). There was no significant association (p>0.05) between most blood or sputum cytokines with PTSD diagnosis or PCL-5 scores both in unadjusted and adjusted analyses.

Interpretation

Our results suggest that PTSD is not associated with blood and sputum inflammatory markers in WTC workers with asthma. These findings suggest that other mechanisms likely explain the association between PTSD and asthma control in WTC exposed individuals.

Cannabis for medical use versus opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

Por: Jeddi · H. M. · Busse · J. W. · Sadeghirad · B. · Levine · M. · Zoratti · M. J. · Wang · L. · Noori · A. · Couban · R. J. · Tarride · J.-E.
Objective

The objective of this study is to evaluate the comparative benefits and harms of opioids and cannabis for medical use for chronic non-cancer pain.

Design

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Data sources

EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, Cannabis-Med, Epistemonikos and the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) from inception to March 2021.

Study selection

Randomised trials comparing any type of cannabis for medical use or opioids, against each other or placebo, with patient follow-up ≥4 weeks.

Data extraction and synthesis

Paired reviewers independently extracted data. We used Bayesian random-effects network meta-analyses to summarise the evidence and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach to evaluate the certainty of evidence and communicate our findings.

Results

Ninety trials involving 22 028 patients were eligible for review, among which the length of follow-up ranged from 28 to 180 days. Moderate certainty evidence showed that opioids provide small improvements in pain, physical functioning and sleep quality versus placebo; low to moderate certainty evidence supported similar effects for cannabis versus placebo. Neither was more effective than placebo for role, social or emotional functioning (all high to moderate certainty evidence). Moderate certainty evidence showed there is probably little to no difference between cannabis for medical use and opioids for physical functioning (weighted mean difference (WMD) 0.47 on the 100-point 36-item Short Form Survey physical component summary score, 95% credible interval (CrI) –1.97 to 2.99), and cannabis resulted in fewer discontinuations due to adverse events versus opioids (OR 0.55, 95% CrI 0.36 to 0.83). Low certainty evidence suggested little to no difference between cannabis and opioids for pain relief (WMD 0.23 cm on a 10 cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), 95% CrI –0.06 to 0.53) or sleep quality (WMD 0.49 mm on a 100 mm VAS, 95% CrI –4.72 to 5.59).

Conclusions

Cannabis for medical use may be similarly effective and result in fewer discontinuations than opioids for chronic non-cancer pain.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42020185184.

❌