Dr Eleonora Leopardi

Purpose: The removal of long-term central venous catheters (CVCs) is not performed according to evidence-based guidelines, thus conveying the message that it is a procedure of secondary importance. Our study aims at comparing the experience at Bambino Gesù Pediatric Hospital before and after the implementation of a dedicated protocol and the identification of a specific area to perform such a procedure under the so-called nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA). Methods: Starting on January 1, 2010, an appropriate protocol regarding long-term CVC removal was applied. Then, data from all patients who underwent CVC removal under NORA regimen were compared with patients who have undergone the same procedure before the beginning of such protocol in terms of complication rate, duration of procedure, and costs. Results: Between January 2010 and December 2012, 266 patients were evaluated for long-term CVC removal under a NORA regimen. Of these, 194 underwent the procedure. In the period from January 2007 to December 2009, 60 out of 82 patients scheduled for elective removal of long-term CVC in the operating theatre were eligible for this study. Median procedure time was 7 min for removal in NORA and 10 min for the operating theatre (p=0.016); no complications occurred. Conclusion: Long-term CVC removal is an often-neglected procedure, carrying a small, but definite rate of complications. Our study shows that CVC removal performed in NORA regimen is safe and feasible, also allowing multiple procedures in the same session with prompt management of possible complications and reduction of the anxiety and pain associated with the procedure.

Background: The rapid and dramatic incursion of the Internet and social networks in everyday life has revolutionised the methods of exchanging data. Web¿2.0 represents the evolution of the Internet as we know it. Internet users are no longer passive receivers, and actively participate in the delivery of information. Medical education cannot evade this process. Increasingly, students are using tablets and smartphones to instantly retrieve medical information on the web or are exchanging materials on their Facebook pages. Medical educators cannot ignore this continuing revolution, and therefore the traditional academic schedules and didactic schemes should be questioned. Analysing opinions collected from medical students regarding old and new teaching methods and tools has become mandatory, with a view towards renovating the process of medical education. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was created with Google® docs and administrated to all students of our medical school. Students were asked to express their opinion on their favourite teaching methods, learning tools, Internet websites and Internet delivery devices. Data analysis was performed using spss. Results: The online survey was completed by 368 students. Although textbooks remain a cornerstone for training, students also identified Internet websites, multimedia non-online material, such as the Encyclopaedia on CD-ROM, and other non-online computer resources as being useful. Discussion: The Internet represented an important aid to support students' learning needs, but textbooks are still their resource of choice. Among the websites noted, Google and Wikipedia significantly surpassed the peer-reviewed medical databases, and access to the Internet was primarily through personal computers in preference to other Internet access devices, such as mobile phones and tablet computers.