A comprehensive description of the competencies required for the performance of an ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus blockade

We addressed four research questions, each relating to the training and assessment of the competencies associated with the performance of ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus blockade (USgABPB). These were: (i) What are the most important determinants of learning of USgABPB? (ii) What is USgABPB? What are the errors most likely to occur when trainees learn to perform this procedure? (iii) How should end-user input be applied to the development of a novel USgABPB simulator? (iv) Does structured simulation based training influence novice learning of the procedure positively? We demonstrated that the most important determinants of learning USgABPB are: (a) Access to a formal structured training programme. (b) Frequent exposure to clinical learning opportunity in an appropriate setting (c) A clinical learning opporunity requires an appropriate patient, trainee and teacher being present at the same time, in an appropriate environment. We carried out a comprehensive description of the procedure. We performed a formal task analysis of USgABPB, identifying (i) 256 specific tasks associated with the safe and effective performance of the procedure, and (ii) the 20 most critical errors likely to occur in this setting. We described a methodology for this and collected data based on detailed, sequential evaluation of prototypes by trainees in anaesthesia. We carried out a pilot randomised control trial assessing the effectiveness of a USgABPB simulator during its development. Our data did not enable us to draw a reliable conclusion to this question; the trail did provide important new learning (as a pilot) to inform future investigation of this question. We believe that the ultimate goal of designing effective simulation-based training and assessment of ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia is closer to realisation as a result of this work. It remains to be proven if this approach will have a positive impact on procedural performance, and more importantly improve patient outcomes.

Preclinical atherosclerosis in rheumatoid arthritis

Introduction: There is accumulating evidence of an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in rheumatoid arthritis patients. A combination of both traditional cardiovascular risks and rheumatoid specific factors appear to be responsible for driving this phenomenon. Rheumatoid arthritis has been an orphan of cardiologists in the past and rheumatologists themselves are not good at CVD screening. Identifying the extent of preclinical atherosclerosis in RA patients will help us to appreciate the magnitude of this serious problem in an Irish population. Methods: We undertook a cross-sectional study of 63 RA patients and 48 OA controls and compared the 2 groups with respect to 1) traditional CV risks factors, 2) serum biomarkers of inflammation, including CRP, TNFα, IL6 and PAI-1, 3) carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT), carotid plaque and ankle-brachial index (ABI) as markers of pre-clinical atherosclerosis, 4) biochemical and ultrasonic measures of endothelial dysfunction and 5) serum and echocardiographic measures of diastolic dysfunction. Within the RA group, we also investigated for associations between markers of inflammation, subclinical atherosclerosis and diastolic dysfunction. Results: Prevalence of traditional CV risks was similar in the RA and OA groups. A number of biomarkers of inflammation were significantly higher in the RA group: CRP, fibrinogen, IL- 2, -4, -6, TNFα. PAI-1, a marker of thrombosis, correlated with disease activity and subclinical atherosclerosis in RA patients. With regard to subclinical atherosclerosis measures, RA patients had a significantly lower ABI than OA patients. Carotid plaque and cIMT readings were similar in RA and OA patients. Assessment of endothelial function revealed that RA patients had significantly higher concentrations of adhesion molecules, in particular sero-positive RA patients and RA smokers. Adhesion molecule concentrations were associated with markers of diastolic dysfunction in RA. Urine PCR, another marker of endothelial dysfunction also correlated with diastolic dysfunction in RA. Assessment of endothelial function with flow mediated dilatation (FMD) found no difference between the RA and OA groups. Disease activity scores in RA patients were associated with endothelial dysfunction, as assessed by FMD. Conclusions: We did not find significant differences in measures of subclinical atherosclerosis, flow mediated dilatation or diastolic function between RA and OA patients. This is most likely in part due to the fact that there is increasing evidence that OA has an inflammatory component to its pathogenesis and is associated with metabolic syndrome and increased CV risk. We reported a significant association between urinary PCR and measures of diastolic dysfunction. Urinary PCR may be a useful screening tool for diastolic dysfunction in RA. The association between RA disease activity and measures of vascular function supports the theory that the excess cardiovascular burden in RA is linked to uncontrolled inflammation.