Big Ears – sonic art for public ears: Reflections on collaborative training

This text critically reflects on the higher education public engagement training program, entitled ‘Big Ears – sonic art for public ears’. The authors detail the objectives and aims as well as the benefits of this initiative for the enhancement of the student learning experience. We consider Schmidt’s (Schmidt, 2012) notion of mis-listening and Christopher Small’s concept of ‘musicking’ (Small, 1998), and develop a critical argument on how public engagement has changed researchers’ views and attitudes about their own research. The text explores how the creative interaction with a young audience has had great impact on the students’ learning experience as well as on their employability/transferable skills, because Big Ears stresses the importance of pulling practice as research away from the academic argument of why artists should be supported inside an institution, and into the realm of the real – what to do when making art, how to make it relevant and applicable to audiences.

Supervised walking in comparison with fitness training for chronic back pain in physiotherapy: results of the SWIFT single-blinded randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN17592092)

Effectiveness of brief/minimal contact self-activation interventions that encourage participation in physical activity (PA) for chronic low back pain (CLBP >12 weeks) is unproven. The primary objective of this assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial was to investigate the difference between an individualized walking programme (WP), group exercise class (EC), and usual physiotherapy (UP, control) in mean change in functional disability at 6 months. A sample of 246 participants with CLBP aged 18 to 65 years (79 men and 167 women; mean age ± SD: 45.4 ± 11.4 years) were recruited from 5 outpatient physiotherapy departments in Dublin, Ireland. Consenting participants completed self-report measures of functional disability, pain, quality of life, psychosocial beliefs, and PA were randomly allocated to the WP (n = 82), EC (n = 83), or UP (n = 81) and followed up at 3 (81%; n = 200), 6 (80.1%; n = 197), and 12 months (76.4%; n = 188). Cost diaries were completed at all follow-ups. An intention-to-treat analysis using a mixed between-within repeated-measures analysis of covariance found significant improvements over time on the Oswestry Disability Index (Primary Outcome), the Numerical Rating Scale, Fear Avoidance-PA scale, and the EuroQol EQ-5D-3L Weighted Health Index (P < 0.05), but no significant between-group differences and small between-group effect sizes (WP: mean difference at 6 months, 6.89 Oswestry Disability Index points, 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.64 to -10.15; EC: -5.91, CI: -2.68 to -9.15; UP: -5.09, CI: -1.93 to -8.24). The WP had the lowest mean costs and the highest level of adherence. Supervised walking provides an effective alternative to current forms of CLBP management.

Foreskin surgery under local anaesthetic – OK? Or oh no!

Aim: Foreskin surgical procedures such as circumcision, prepuceplasty, frenuloplasty, dorsal slit, reduction of paraphimosis etc. in the adult male is usually performed by both general surgeons and urologists. Our aim was to evaluate the acceptance of performing these procedures in the day procedure unit or in the emergency unit under penile block. 
Method: Fifty patients who underwent foreskin surgeries under local anaesthetic (LA) were evaluated with their experience. Twenty patients who underwent circumcision, 20 patients who underwent foreskin preserving operations such as frenuloplasty or prepuceplasty and 10 patients who underwent other procedures such as reduction of paraphimosis (five) and dorsal slit (five) were included inthe study. The patients were asked about their symptoms such as pain or discomfort during local infiltration of lignocaine, any discomfort during the actual procedure, post-operative discomfort and general acceptance. All the patients were given penile block using smaller size needle (25 gauge, 5/8th inch orange sterile luer slip hypodermic needle) and 1% plain lignocaine. Thirty doctors from general surgery (10), urology (10) and emergency medicine (10) participated in the survey. They were asked about their opinion, confidence and preference about performing foreskin surgical procedures under LA. This included both junior trainees, middle grade doctors and consultants. The majority of middle grade doctors and consultants were fairly confident in performing procedures under LA, whereas the junior trainees in surgery, urology and emergency were lacking confidence. 
Conclusion: Penile block is a safe and effective way ofproviding sufficient anaesthesia for foreskin surgeries. Thetechnique is easy to learn. It reduces post-operative pain aswell. It can reduce the risk and cost of administering generalanaesthesia. doctors who are in training surgical specialityand emergency medicine should be encouraged to learnthe principles and technique in administering penile block.