Using psychometric ability to improve education in ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia: a multicentre randomised controlled trial

The learning curve for novices developing regional anaesthesia skills, such as real-time ultrasound-guided needle manipulation, may be affected by innate visuospatial ability, as this influences spatial cognition and motor co-ordination. We conducted a multinational randomised controlled trial to test if novices with low visuospatial ability would perform better at an ultrasound-guided needling task with deliberate practice training than with discovery learning. Visuospatial ability was evaluated using the mental rotations test-A. We recruited 140 medical students and randomly allocated them into low-ability control (discovery learning), low-ability intervention (received deliberate practice), high-ability control, and high-ability intervention groups. Primary outcome was the time taken to complete the needling task, and there was no significant difference between groups: median (IQR [range]) low-ability control 125 s (69–237 [43–600 s]); low-ability intervention 163 s (116–276 [44–600 s]); high-ability control 130 s (80–210 [41–384 s]); and high-ability intervention 177 s (113–285 [43–547 s]), p = 0.06. No difference was found using the global rating scale: mean (95%CI) low-ability control 53% (95%CI 46–60%); low-ability intervention 61% (95%CI 53–68%); high-ability control 63% (95%CI 56–70%); and high-ability intervention 66% (95%CI 60–72%), p = 0.05. For overall procedure pass/fail, the low-ability control group pass rate of 42% (14/33) was significantly less than the other three groups: low-ability intervention 69% (25/36); high-ability control 68% (25/37); and high-ability intervention 85% (29/34) p = 0.003. Further research is required to determine the role of visuospatial ability screening in training for ultrasound-guided needle skills.     

An audit on HIV antibody test uptake amongst GUM clinic attendees in the West Midland region

We audited the practice of offering, and the uptake of, an HIV antibody test amongst genitourinary medicine clinic patients in the West Midlands region. There were wide variations in the offering (from 14 to 100%) and uptake (18 to 64%) of the test in the different clinics within the same region.     

CD4 trajectory adjusting for dropout among HIV-positive patients receiving combination antiretroviral therapy in an East African HIV care centre

Objective

Estimates of CD4 response to antiretroviral therapy (ART) obtained by averaging data from patients in care, overestimate population CD4 response and treatment program effectiveness because they do not consider data from patients who are deceased or not in care. We use mathematical methods to assess and adjust for this bias based on patient characteristics.

Design

We examined data from 25,261 HIV-positive patients from the East Africa IeDEA Consortium.

Methods

We used inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) to represent patients not in care by patients in care with similar characteristics. We address two questions: What would the median CD4 be “had everyone starting ART remained on observation?” and “were everyone starting ART maintained on treatment?”

Results

Routine CD4 count estimates were higher than adjusted estimates even under the best-case scenario of maintaining all patients on treatment. Two years after starting ART, differences between estimates diverged from 30 cells/µL, assuming similar mortality and treatment access among dropouts as patients in care, to over 100 cells/µL assuming 20% lower survival and 50% lower treatment access among dropouts. When considering only patients in care, the proportion of patients with CD4 above 350 cells/µL was 50% adjusted to below 30% when accounting for patients not in care. One-year mortality diverged 6–14% from the naïve estimates depending on assumptions about access to care among lost patients.

Conclusions

Ignoring mortality and loss to care results in over-estimation of ART response for patients starting treatment and exaggerates the efficacy of treatment programs administering it.