The impact of surgical training can extend beyond trainees and can affect the wellness of their support persons who endure the effects of training alongside trainees. Programs should be aware of these effects and develop meaningful strategies to aid trainees and their support persons.The impact of surgical training can extend beyond trainees and can affect the wellness of their support persons who endure the effects of training alongside trainees. Programs should be aware of these effects and develop meaningful strategies to aid trainees and their support persons. To evaluate the resolution of obesity-related comorbidities after gastric bypass in relation to age. Previous studies have shown that age > 60 years is associated with a significant, but small, increased risk of complications after gastric bypass. The effect in terms of improvement of obesity-related comorbidities in this group of patients is not studied. Data on 57 215 patients operated with primary gastric bypass between May 2007 and December 2018 was extracted from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry, (SOReg). Odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI for resolution of comorbidities in five-years age groups at 1, 2 and 5 years postoperatively was calculated by logistic regression with the entire cohort of patients as reference. Resolution was defined as no longer in need for pharmacological (or CPAP) treatment. Follow-up rates in all eligible patients were 89, 69, and 59% at 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively and 64% in patients > 60 years at 5 years. At baseline, the prevalence of most comorbidities was higher in patients above 60 years. In this group of patients, the preoperative prevalence of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia and OSAS was reduced at 5 years by 45, 10, 24, and 62%, respectively. Compared to all patients, the OR (95%CI) for resolution of these comorbidities in patients above 60 years at five years were 0.70 (0.57- 0.86) 0.45 (0.37 - 0.53), 0.80 (0.63 - 1.01) and 0.54 (0.40 - 0.72). Although to somewhat lower rates compared to younger patients, marked and sustained improvements in obesity-related comorbidities are seen after gastric bypass in patients > 60 years. This, together with the finding that bariatric surgery is safe in this group of patients suggest that age should not be considered an exclusion criterion by itself. 60 years. This, together with the finding that bariatric surgery is safe in this group of patients suggest that age should not be considered an exclusion criterion by itself. To extend the IDEAL Framework for device innovation, IDEAL-D, to include the preclinical stage of development (Stage 0). In previous work, the IDEAL collaboration has proposed frameworks for new surgical techniques and complex therapeutic technologies, the central tenet being that development and evaluation can and should proceed together in an ordered and logical manner that balances innovation and safety. Following agreement at the IDEAL Collaboration Council, a multidisciplinary working group was formed comprising 12 representatives from healthcare, academia, industry, and a patient advocate. The group conducted a series of discussions following the principles used in the development of the original IDEAL Framework. Importantly, IDEAL aims for maximal transparency, optimal validity in the evaluation of primary effects and minimisation of potential risk to patients or others. The proposals were subjected to further review and editing by members of the IDEAL Council before a final consensus version was adopted. In considering which studies are required before a first-in-human study, we have (1) classified devices according to what they do and the risks they carry, (2) classified studies according to what they show about the device, and (3) made recommendations based on the principle that the more invasive and high risk a device is, the greater proof required of their safety and effectiveness prior to progression to clinical studies (Stage 1). The proposed recommendations for preclinical evaluation of medical devices represent a proportionate and pragmatic approach that balances the de-risking of first-in-human translational studies against the benefits of rapid translation of new devices into clinical practice.The proposed recommendations for preclinical evaluation of medical devices represent a proportionate and pragmatic approach that balances the de-risking of first-in-human translational studies against the benefits of rapid translation of new devices into clinical practice. This study aimed to compare the effects of ERAS and conventional programs on short-term outcomes after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG). Currently, the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program is broadly applied in surgical areas. 4SC-202 Although several benefits of LDG with the ERAS program have been covered, high-level evidence is still limited, specifically in advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The present study was designed as a randomized, multicenter, unblinded trial. The enrollment criteria included histologically confirmed cT2-4aN0-3M0 gastric adenocarcinoma. Postoperative complications, mortality, readmission, medical costs, recovery and laboratory outcomes were compared between the ERAS and conventional groups. Between April 2019 and May 2020, 400 consecutive patients who met the enrollment criteria were enrolled. They were randomly allocated to either the ERAS group (n = 200) or the conventional group (n = 200). After excluding patients who did not undergo surgery or gastrectomy, 370 patien faster recovery, a shorter postoperative hospitalization length, and lower medical costs after LDG without increasing complication and readmission rates. Moreover, enhanced recovery in the ERAS group enables early initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy.The ERAS program provides a faster recovery, a shorter postoperative hospitalization length, and lower medical costs after LDG without increasing complication and readmission rates. Moreover, enhanced recovery in the ERAS group enables early initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy. The objectives of this study were to review the coaching literature to 1) characterize the criteria integral to the coaching process, specifically in surgery, and 2) describe how these criteria have been variably implemented in published studies. Coaching is a distinct educational intervention, but within surgery the term is frequently used interchangeably with other more established terms such as teaching and mentoring. A systematic search was performed of the MEDLINE and Cochrane databases to identify studies that used coach/coaching as an intervention for surgeons for either technical or nontechnical skills. Study quality was evaluated using the Medical Education Research Quality Instrument (MERQI). A total of 2280 articles were identified and after screening by title, abstract and full text, 35 remained. Thirteen coaching criteria (a-m)were identified in 4 general categories 1. overarching goal (a. refine performance of an existing skill set), 2. the coach (b. trusting partnership, c. avoids assessment, d.