Hinrichsen Hollis (statebeach9)

053) and 30-day clinically significant morbidity (17.6% vs 23.5%, P=.180) or mortality (11.8% in each group). However, laparoscopy was associated with significantly shorter hospital stay (0 vs 2.8days, P<.001) and greater proportion of day-case procedures (64.7% vs 0%, P<.001). Laparoscopic insertion of FTG is safe, can be performed as a day-case procedure, and is associated with shorter hospital stay compared with open surgery; it should be preferred over open surgery where local expertise exists. Laparoscopic insertion of FTG is safe, can be performed as a day-case procedure, and is associated with shorter hospital stay compared with open surgery; it should be preferred over open surgery where local expertise exists. Surveillance colonoscopy has been shown to be an effective tool for prevention of CRC in high-risk populations, if adhered to. We aimed to discover the sequelae of late surveillance in a cohort of patient's overdue for colonoscopy, in particular the development of colorectal cancer (CRC) or advanced adenoma (AA) within surveillance subgroups. We conducted a retrospective cohort study on all patients from the Bay of Plenty District Health Board region, New Zealand, placed on the colonoscopy surveillance waitlist from 2006 onwards who had their procedure completed between 1 November 2016 and 31 January 2018, when the total surveillance list was declared up-to-date. Patients with overdue surveillance, defined as done later than 90 days after the recommended due date were compared to patients who were done either early, or on time. 786 patients were recorded as overdue for surveillance colonoscopy, and 386 were completed early or on time. The median time overdue was 22 months. Three cases (0.4%) of CRC weres article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. Whilst overdue surveillance is not predictive of increased CRC, it is associated with an increase in expected number of AA, particularly in patients having surveillance for previous high-risk polypectomy. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges have recently recommended all outpatient letters to be written directly to patients. We aimed to evaluate clinician and patient preferences for their outpatient letters from a head and neck department at a single-centre secondary care hospital. A multiple-choice questionnaire was designed and circulated to patients over a 2-week period. The primary outcome measure was the patient preference for the writing style. In order to evaluate existing writing styles, clinic letters were retrospectively sampled from all consultant and registrar grade otolaryngology (ENT) and oral maxillofacial (OMFS) surgeons in the department. These were analysed for readability via Flesch Reading Ease Score and audience. Of all 80 included patient responses, 42 expressed a preference for letters to be written directly to the patient (52.5%). Only 5.0% (n=4) of respondents exhibited a preference for letters to be written to their GP, with 42.5% (n=34) of patients having no preference. All 54 surgeon letters (100%) were addressed to GPs. The average FRE score was 58.5, representing a reading level of "high school education." When considered in the wider body of similar studies, there is convincing evidence that patients would prefer letters to be written to them rather than GPs. The authors believe that there should be a push towards patient-directed letters becoming the norm. This will improve patients' understanding of their own health and treatment decisions, allowing them to be more involved in their care and increase patient-centred consultations. When considered in the wider body of similar studies, there is convincing evidence that patients would prefer letters to be written to them rather than GPs. The authors believe that there should be a push towards patient-directed le