Validación de un modelo de riesgo de evisceración

Introduction

The aim of this study is to determine the usefulness of the risk model developed by van Ramshorst et al., and a modification of the same, to predict the abdominal wound dehiscence's risk in patients who underwent midline laparotomy incisions.

Materials and methods

Observational longitudinal retrospective study. Sample: Patients who underwent midline laparotomy incisions in the General and Digestive Surgery Department of the Sabadell's Hospital–Parc Taulí’s Health and University Corporation–Barcelona, between January 1, 2010 and June 30, 2010. Dependent variable: Abdominal wound dehiscence. Independent variables: Global risk score, preoperative risk score (postoperative variables were excluded), global and preoperative probabilities of developing abdominal wound dehiscence.

Results

Sample: 176 patients. Patients with abdominal wound dehiscence: 15 (8.5%). The global risk score of abdominal wound dehiscence group (mean: 4.97; IC 95%: 4.15-5.79) was better than the global risk score of No abdominal wound dehiscence group (mean: 3.41; IC 95%: 3.20-3.62). This difference is statistically significant (P<.001). The preoperative risk score of abdominal wound dehiscence group (mean: 3.27; IC 95%: 2.69-3.84) was better than the preoperative risk score of No abdominal wound dehiscence group (mean: 2.77; IC 95%: 2.64-2.89), also a statistically significant difference (P<.05). The global risk score (area under the ROC curve: 0.79) has better accuracy than the preoperative risk score (area under the ROC curve: 0.64).

Conclusion

The risk model developed by van Ramshorst et al. to predict the abdominal wound dehiscence's risk in the preoperative phase has a limited usefulness. Additional refinements in the preoperative risk score are needed to improve its accuracy.     

Avaliação do clube de revista de anestesiologia por meio de mudanças semânticas

Background and objectives

The interactive approach of a journal club has been described in the medical education literature. The aim of this investigation is to present an assessment of journal club as a tool to address the question whether residents read more and critically.

Methods

This study reports the performance of medical residents in anesthesiology from the Clinics Hospital – University of São Paulo Medical School. All medical residents were invited to answer five questions derived from discussed papers. The answer sheet consisted of an affirmative statement with a Likert type scale (totally disagree–disagree–not sure–agree–totally agree), each related to one of the chosen articles. The results were evaluated by means of item analysis – difficulty index and discrimination power.

Results

Residents filled one hundred and seventy three evaluations in the months of December 2011 (n = 51), July 2012 (n = 66) and December 2012 (n = 56). The first exam presented all items with straight statement, second and third exams presented mixed items. Separating “totally agree” from “agree” increased the difficulty indices, but did not improve the discrimination power.

Conclusions

The use of a journal club assessment with straight and inverted statements and by means of five points scale for agreement has been shown to increase its item difficulty and discrimination power. This may reflect involvement either with the reading or the discussion during the journal meeting.