Project description:BackgroundUsing an updated dataset with more patients and extended follow-up, we further established cancer patient characteristics associated with COVID-19 death.MethodsData on all cancer patients with a positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) at Guy's Cancer Centre and King's College Hospital between 29 February and 31 July 2020 was used. Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to identify which factors were associated with COVID-19 mortality.ResultsThree hundred and six SARS-CoV-2-positive cancer patients were included. Seventy-one had mild/moderate and 29% had severe COVID-19. Seventy-two patients died of COVID-19 (24%), of whom 35 died <7 days. Male sex [hazard ratio (HR): 1.97 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.15-3.38)], Asian ethnicity [3.42 (1. 59-7.35)], haematological cancer [2.03 (1.16-3.56)] and a cancer diagnosis for >2-5 years [2.81 (1.41-5.59)] or ≥5 years were associated with an increased mortality. Age >60 years and raised C-reactive protein (CRP) were also associated with COVID-19 death. Haematological cancer, a longer-established cancer diagnosis, dyspnoea at diagnosis and raised CRP were indicative of early COVID-19-related death in cancer patients (<7 days from diagnosis).ConclusionsFindings further substantiate evidence for increased risk of COVID-19 mortality for male and Asian cancer patients, and those with haematological malignancies or a cancer diagnosis >2 years. These factors should be accounted for when making clinical decisions for cancer patients.
Project description:BackgroundThe professional development of under-represented faculty may be enhanced by mentorship, but we understand very little about the mechanisms by which mentoring brings about change. Our study posed the research question, what are the mechanisms by which mentoring may support professional development in under-represented groups? The study aims to: (i) to pilot a mentoring scheme for female academics; (ii) to compare various health-related and attitudinal measures in mentees at baseline, 6 months, and 1 year into the mentoring relationship and, (iii) to compare pre-mentoring expectations to outcomes at 6 months and 1 year follow-up for mentees and mentors.MethodsFemale academic mentees were matched 1:1 or 2:1 with more senior academic mentors. Online surveys were conducted to compare health-related and attitudinal measures and expectations of mentoring at baseline with outcomes at 6 months and 1 year using paired t-tests and McNemar's test for matched cohort data.ResultsN = 46 mentoring pairs, 44 (96%) mentees completed the pre-mentoring survey, 37 (80%) at 6 months and 30 (65%) at 1 year. Job-related well-being (anxiety-contentment), self-esteem and self-efficacy all improved significantly and work-family conflict diminished at 1 year. Highest expectations were career progression (39; 89%), increased confidence (38; 87%), development of networking skills (33; 75%), better time-management (29; 66%) and better work-life balance (28; 64%). For mentees, expectations at baseline were higher than perceived achievements at 6 months or 1 year follow-up. For mentors (N = 39), 36 (92%) completed the pre-mentoring survey, 32 (82%) at 6 months and 28 (72%) at 1 year. Mentors' highest expectations were of satisfaction in seeing people progress (26; 69%), seeing junior staff develop and grow (19; 53%), helping solve problems (18; 50%), helping women advance their careers (18; 50%) and helping remove career obstacles (13; 36%). Overall, gains at 6 months and 1 year exceeded pre-mentoring expectations.ConclusionsThis uncontrolled pilot study suggests that mentoring can improve aspects of job-related well-being, self-esteem and self-efficacy over 6 months, with further improvements seen after 1 year for female academics. Work-family conflict can also diminish. Despite these gains, mentees' prior expectations were shown to be unrealistically high, but mentors' expectations were exceeded.
Project description:PurposeChanges in undergraduate medical curricula, combined with reforms in postgraduate education, have training implications for surgical skills acquisition in a climate of reduced clinical exposure. Confidence and prior experience influences the educational impact of learning. Currently there is no basic surgical skills (BSS) programme integrated into undergraduate curricula in the United Kingdom. We explored the role of a dedicated BSS programme for undergraduates in improving confidence and influencing careers in King's College London School of Medicine, and the programme was evaluated.MethodsA programme was designed in-line with the established Royal College of Surgeons course. Undergraduates were taught four key skills over four weeks: knot-tying, basic-suturing, tying-at-depth and chest-drain insertion, using low-fidelity bench-top models. A Likert-style questionnaire was designed to determine educational value and influence on career choice. Qualitative data was collected.ResultsOnly 29% and 42% of students had undertaken previous practice in knot-tying and basic suturing, respectively. 96% agreed that skills exposure prior to starting surgical rotations was essential and felt a dedicated course would augment undergraduate training. There was a significant increase in confidence in the practice and knowledge of all skills taught (p<0.01), with a greater motivation to be actively involved in the surgical firm and theatres.ConclusionA simple, structured BSS programme can increase the confidence and motivation of students. Early surgical skills targeting is valuable for students entering surgical, related allied, and even traditionally non-surgical specialties such as general practice. Such experience can increase the confidence of future junior doctors and trainees. We advocate the introduction of a BSS programme into United Kingdom undergraduate curricula.