JRSM short reports最新文献

A standardised terminology for describing medical devices can enable safe and unambiguous exchange of information. Proposed changes to EU-wide medical devices regulations mandate the use of such a system. This article reviews two important classification systems for medical devices in the UK. The Global Medical Device Nomenclature (GMDN) provides a classification system specifically for medical devices and diagnostics, and facilitates data exchange between manufacturers and regulators. SNOMED CT is the terminology of choice in the NHS for communicating, sharing and storing information about patients' healthcare episodes. Harmonisation of GMDN and SNOMED CT will encourage use of single terminology throughout the lifetime of a device; from regulatory approval through clinical use and post-marketing surveillance. Manufacturers will be required to register medical devices with a European device database (Eudamed) and to fit certain devices with a Unique Device Identifier; both are efforts to improve transparency and traceability of medical devices. Successful implementation of these elements depends on having a consistent nomenclature for medical devices.

Objective: There have been concerns about the potential increases in operating time associated with the use of individually wrapped presterilized small orthopaedic implants compared with our traditional method of screw banks. We set out to quantify this theory.

Design: Prospective experimental study.

Setting: Theatre.

Participants: Orthopaedic Surgical Trainees and Theatre Scrub team.

Main outcome measure: The time taken to complete the operation.

Results: The use of prepacked and sterilized implants added 2 min 56 s to the use of a bank with a full complement of normal screws that required tapping and 3 min 58 s if self-tapping screws were used (P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Using individually wrapped presterilized small orthopaedic implants increases operating time.

Mixed methods research is the use of quantitative and qualitative methods in a single study or series of studies. It is an emergent methodology which is increasingly used by health researchers, especially within health services research. There is a growing literature on the theory, design and critical appraisal of mixed methods research. However, there are few papers that summarize this methodological approach for health practitioners who wish to conduct or critically engage with mixed methods studies. The objective of this paper is to provide an accessible introduction to mixed methods for clinicians and researchers unfamiliar with this approach. We present a synthesis of key methodological literature on mixed methods research, with examples from our own work and that of others, to illustrate the practical applications of this approach within health research. We summarize definitions of mixed methods research, the value of this approach, key aspects of study design and analysis, and discuss the potential challenges of combining quantitative and qualitative methods and data. One of the key challenges within mixed methods research is the successful integration of quantitative and qualitative data during analysis and interpretation. However, the integration of different types of data can generate insights into a research question, resulting in enriched understanding of complex health research problems.