Skip to content
Choose a package
Two adults talking across a table in a consultation room; one wears blue clinical attire.

Plastic surgery · Preoperative health

Preoperative
Health
Assessment

Know what is reported.
Keep review accountable.

Work through fictional adult elective-surgery cases to distinguish reported history from reviewed findings, ask focused evaluation questions, and hand unresolved issues to the responsible professionals.

Choose a package Explore the curriculum

Eight fictional cases on baseline information, selective review and accountable handoff.

Choose a package
Lessons in the full curriculum
8
Thematic modules
3
Format
Case-based study
Delivery and access
Confirm by email

For qualified teams and supervised trainees

A booking is not
a health decision.

This course is for appropriately qualified plastic-surgery and perioperative clinicians, supervised advanced trainees, clinical coordinators, and educators acting within their professional roles in adult elective plastic surgery.

Across eight fictional cases, learners label the source and date of a reported fact, compare it with existing records, and identify which question needs qualified review. The curriculum moves from the baseline through selective evaluation to a dated handoff and reassessment triggers.

Exercises do not diagnose a person, order tests, change treatment, assign anesthesia fitness, clear surgery, obtain consent or decide on deferral. The treating surgeon, anesthesia team and other qualified professionals retain their distinct responsibilities under local rules.

Skills you will practice

Make uncertainty
visible to the team.

01

Trace each statement

Label an adult's report, an existing record, a documented professional assessment and an unresolved question distinctly.

02

Build a baseline

Organize history, symptoms, function, therapies, reported reactions and prior operative or anesthetic events with source and date.

03

Ask why a test matters

Frame a focused question an examination, prior result, possible investigation or consultation might answer without issuing a blanket order.

04

Notice health signals

Recognize healing, cardiopulmonary, sleep, thrombosis and bleeding concerns that belong in qualified discussion.

05

Assign professional ownership

Distinguish the coordinator's information role from the treating surgeon's and anesthesia professional's respective assessments.

06

Document open handoffs

Record the recipient, response status and triggers for renewed review without treating a referral as clearance.

Course curriculum

Three modules.
Eight case lessons.

Eight lessons in three modules. Open each lesson for its objective, four developed topics, a fictional exercise with pass criteria and source-mapped reading. Each module closes with a synthesis checkpoint.

$19 Foundation: lessons 1–6$29 Full: lessons 1–8

Module 01 · Lessons 1–3

Roles, Records, and Baseline Health

Build a reliable baseline while preserving who supplied each fact and which professional must evaluate it. These fictional intake records are teaching material, not completed medical assessments.

Hands straighten a closed blue folder between closed grey and sand folders on a wood table.
Illustrative organization of separate information sources before qualified review; no record contents or clearance is shown.
01Purpose, Roles, and Timing of Preoperative Assessment

Learning objective

Given a fictional booking packet, identify the assessment's purpose, distinguish four team roles, and write a provisional timeline that does not turn scheduling into clearance.

In this lesson

  • Assessment is a process, not a certificate: The relevant questions depend on the adult's current health and the proposed operation. A booked date establishes an administrative plan; it cannot establish fitness, anesthesia status, consent, or a decision to operate. The record must distinguish pending from completed professional review. ASA standards; RCS surgical practice.
  • Role ownership across the pathway: The treating surgeon evaluates surgical appropriateness and coordinates elective planning within their remit; the anesthesia professional determines medical status and an anesthesia-care plan for anesthesia care. Other qualified clinicians contribute within scope. A coordinator can collect records and arrange communication without converting an intake response into a clinical judgment. ASA standards; RCS surgical practice.
  • Timing and changed information: An early questionnaire can surface questions, but the responsible clinicians must assess current information at the appropriate time. A later symptom, therapy change, or missing consultation reopens the relevant question even when a previous form is complete. Timing is individualized rather than a fixed course rule. ASA practice advisory; RCS team safety.
  • Status words with evidence behind them: “Reported,” “recorded,” “review requested,” and “review documented” each mean something different. A defensible status line names the source and date, the missing decision, and its owner; it never substitutes “cleared” for a handoff or a booking. Capture unresolved health questions for the responsible surgeon's risk-and-options discussion and the anesthesia professional's separate care-and-consent discussion, without attempting either conversation on their behalf. RCS patient partnership; ASA standards.
Independent fictional exercise

Fictional adult Ada has selected an elective cosmetic procedure and received a date. A coordinator marks “health cleared” after Ada submits an intake form, although the prior operative record has not arrived and no treating-surgeon or anesthesia review is documented. Create a four-role responsibility map and a three-step timeline from intake to qualified review; replace the status line with one sentence.

Pass criteria: Pass only if the response identifies Ada's report, the missing record, surgeon and anesthesia responsibilities, the coordinator's limited role, and a review point before any decision is represented as complete. It must reserve procedure-specific risks and options for the treating surgeon's discussion and anesthesia-care consent for the anesthesia professional. It must not assign fitness, choose an operation, claim consent, or treat the date as approval.

02Medical History, Comorbidities, and Functional Baseline

Learning objective

Convert a fictional adult's account and two existing records into a dated baseline that separates established conditions, current reports, functional change, and unanswered questions.

In this lesson

  • History has provenance: An adult's account of a diagnosis, a problem-list entry, and a clinician's current finding carry different evidentiary weight. Record source and date, resolve apparent contradictions through qualified review, and avoid calling a blank field a negative answer. ASA standards; RCS patient partnership.
  • Comorbidities in procedure context: Existing cardiovascular, respiratory, metabolic, and other conditions may matter differently according to the proposed procedure and current control. Gather prior care and available results, then formulate questions for the responsible team; a diagnosis label alone neither approves nor excludes surgery. The UK diabetes pathway is an example of multidisciplinary review, not a universal numeric eligibility rule. NICE preoperative tests; CPOC diabetes guideline.
  • Function as the person's baseline: Ask what everyday activity the adult can ordinarily manage and whether this has changed. Self-reported stairs, walking, or usual tasks are context for a clinician's assessment, not a score or a substitute for a directed examination. New loss of function or symptoms should be routed for qualified review. US cardiovascular guideline; ASA practice advisory.
  • Question-led synthesis: A useful baseline names current symptoms, prior investigations or referrals, including any known sleep-apnea assessment or therapy record, missing records, and the question each item raises. A report of sleep-related breathing is not a diagnosis. Where a specialist opinion exists, identify its date and scope rather than treating it as all-purpose operative permission. ASA standards; CPOC adult OSA pathway.
Independent fictional exercise

Fictional adult Ben reports treated hypertension, a past diagnosis of asthma, and that climbing stairs has recently become harder. A two-year-old clinic letter calls the asthma stable; a current intake form leaves the symptom field blank. Create a five-row baseline table with source, date, reported fact, uncertainty, and qualified-review question.

Pass criteria: Pass only if the response distinguishes Ben's current account from the older letter and blank form, records the functional change as unresolved, identifies who should assess it under the local pathway, and avoids diagnosing its cause, assigning capacity, requesting a test, or declaring suitability.

Selected reading

03Medicines, Allergies, and Prior Surgical or Anesthetic Events

Learning objective

Reconcile a fictional medicine and prior-event history into a source-marked list, identify at least three discrepancies or unknowns, and route them without giving a drug or allergy-management instruction.

In this lesson

  • A complete exposure inventory: Include prescribed medicines, nonprescription products, supplements, nicotine, alcohol, and other substances as reported, with names, current use, and source where known. Ask the adult and compare available records; do not infer use or a safe stop/restart plan from a list alone. ACS medication information; ASA standards.
  • Reconciliation is not medication management: A prior list may omit a recent change, dose, indication, or prescriber. Flag the mismatch and send it to the responsible surgeon, anesthesia professional, or other qualified prescriber under local process. The lesson supplies no anticoagulant, diabetes-drug, analgesic, supplement, or hormonal-therapy schedule. ACS medication information; NICE preoperative tests.
  • Reported reaction versus confirmed allergy: Preserve the adult's words about the suspected substance, reaction, timing, treatment, and prior documentation, including uncertainty when details are unknown. A “no known allergies” field can conflict with a later report; qualified clinicians must reconcile the record and decide whether specialist allergy assessment is needed. NICE drug-allergy guidance.
  • Prior operative and anesthetic events: Record the operation or anesthetic, approximate date, reported problem, and whether the anesthetic chart or event narrative is available. A suspected perioperative hypersensitivity event calls for qualified review and potentially specialist referral under applicable guidance; a vague prior problem is neither an allergy diagnosis nor a prediction of recurrence. ASA standards; BSACI perioperative allergy referral.
Independent fictional exercise

Fictional adult Cora reports a current prescription blood thinner, an herbal supplement omitted from the medication list, hives after an unnamed antibiotic years ago, and severe nausea after a prior operation. The old discharge note mentions nausea but the intake template says “no allergies.” Produce a reconciled four-part inventory and an owner-and-question list for each discrepancy.

Pass criteria: Pass only if the response preserves Cora's reported reaction without certifying its cause, flags the conflicting allergy field and missing antibiotic name, records both current exposures and the prior event with their sources, and assigns qualified review. It must not tell Cora to stop or continue a drug, diagnose an allergy, prescribe prevention, or predict anesthesia safety.

Module checkpoint

Module 1 checkpoint — A baseline is not a clearance: Fictional adult Imani has a provisional booking, a current report of reduced exercise tolerance, an older clinic note, an unlisted supplement, an uncertain past medicine reaction, and no available anesthesia record from a prior procedure. Make a dated source-and-status table, a question register covering every open issue, and a role map for the coordinator, surgeon, anesthesia professional, and any relevant specialist. Pass only if the response distinguishes current report from older evidence, identifies the conflicting or missing information, gives each open issue a qualified owner and follow-up question, and keeps the booking provisional without assigning fitness, ordering tests, changing medicines, or certifying an allergy.

Module 02 · Lessons 4–6

Selective Evaluation and Health Factors

Move from the baseline to questions that require professional assessment. An investigation is considered because it may answer a defined clinical question in context, not because every adult receives the same panel.

An older adult gestures across a round table while a person in dark teal scrubs listens; a closed notebook and pen lie between them.
Illustrative conversation about health factors; no test, diagnosis, or clearance is shown.
04Focused Examination and Indication-Based Testing

Learning objective

Audit a fictional preoperative request for routine investigations, connect each proposed evaluation to a person- and procedure-specific question, and identify when no automatic test follows from the information supplied.

In this lesson

  • History directs examination: The treating professionals use the adult's history, current symptoms, proposed procedure, and anesthesia plan to decide what focused examination is relevant. A learner may state the question to be assessed but does not perform or interpret an examination beyond their role. ASA standards; ASA practice advisory.
  • An indication before an investigation: Ask what decision a result could inform, whether an existing recent result is relevant, and which authorized clinician would order and interpret a test. Routine repetition without a question can add work and confusion; a normal result does not resolve an unrelated concern. NICE preoperative tests; ASA practice advisory.
  • Guidance has defined populations and limits: NICE NG45 addresses elective surgery for people over 16, with exclusions and UK procedure grades that cannot be blindly applied to every plastic-surgery setting. Cardiovascular guidance likewise calls for selective assessment and avoids testing that would not change care. Neither becomes a coordinator's order set. NICE preoperative tests; US cardiovascular guideline.
  • Results need an owner and a question: If a qualified clinician requests a test or consultation, the record should show who will review the result, whether it answers the original question, and what remains open. “Results pending” and “result available” are different from an interpreted clinical decision. ASA standards; NICE preoperative tests.
Independent fictional exercise

Fictional adult Devi has a proposed elective procedure, no symptoms recorded on a brief form, a prior laboratory report of uncertain date, and an auto-generated order request for the same broad panel given to every booking. Create a four-column audit (question, available information, qualified decision-maker, unresolved status) and revise the request into a neutral team query.

Pass criteria: Pass only if the response rejects an automatic panel as a conclusion, checks the age and relevance of the existing report, identifies the missing procedure and health context, and leaves both whether to test and how to interpret results with an authorized professional. It must not issue a test order, declare that no test is ever needed, or infer clearance from a normal form.

05Healing, Nutrition, Tobacco, and Metabolic Health

Learning objective

Identify reported healing-related factors in a fictional case, state their information gaps, and prepare qualified review questions without setting a biological threshold, intervention, or waiting period.

In this lesson

  • Healing depends on context: Planned incision, tissue handling, comorbidities, infection concerns, and prior wound problems may change what the treating team needs to consider. A learner can collect the history and ask about an unresolved skin or wound concern without diagnosing infection or choosing a prevention protocol. NICE surgical-site infection; WHO infection guidance.
  • Nutrition and support as assessment questions: Reduced intake, unintended weight change, or difficulty obtaining food may warrant a qualified conversation about nutritional status and support. NICE's formal preoperative nutritional-screening recommendation depends on surgery grade; it is not a mandatory screen for every cosmetic booking. The course gives no supplement regimen, weight target, laboratory cut-off, or claim that a single measure predicts healing. NICE perioperative care.
  • Tobacco and nicotine with honest limits: Ask about cigarettes, vaping, nicotine products, and relevant exposure in a nonjudgmental way. The ASPS plastic-surgery reference associates these exposures with healing concerns, while procedure and individual factors matter; its examples cannot become a universal abstinence interval, test requirement, or automatic deferral. ASPS smoking reference.
  • Metabolic health and existing treatment: A reported diabetes history or other metabolic concern should be accompanied by current care, available records, and a question for the responsible multidisciplinary team. The UK diabetes pathway illustrates why an individualized perioperative plan and handoff matter; do not infer control from one old result, alter medicines, or impose its numerical thresholds as course-level eligibility rules. CPOC diabetes guideline; NICE preoperative tests.
Independent fictional exercise

Fictional adult Eli reports daily nicotine vaping, reduced appetite over recent months, diabetes managed by another clinician, and a new irritated area of skin near the proposed operative region. A coordinator writes “stop vaping for a standard period, then proceed.” Build a factor/source/unknown/owner table and replace that instruction with questions for qualified assessment.

Pass criteria: Pass only if the response records all four factors as reports rather than diagnoses, routes the skin concern and metabolic history to appropriate clinicians, asks about nutritional context and nicotine exposure, and leaves timing and any support plan individualized. It must not diagnose infection, specify cessation or treatment intervals, order a laboratory test, change therapy, or approve surgery.

Selected reading

06Cardiopulmonary, Sleep, Thrombosis, and Bleeding Signals

Learning objective

Sort a fictional case's cardiopulmonary, sleep-related, thrombosis, and bleeding clues into distinct qualified-review questions while stating the setting limits of cited VTE guidance.

In this lesson

  • Cardiopulmonary symptoms and function: Existing disease, new symptoms, and changed activity tolerance belong in a current professional assessment. A cardiovascular guideline supports a stepwise, selective approach, but no course worksheet calculates the adult's risk or indicates a cardiac test or procedure decision. US cardiovascular guideline; ASA standards.
  • Sleep-related reports without diagnosis: Reported loud snoring, observed breathing pauses, known sleep-apnea care, or existing therapy can be relevant to the anesthesia interview. The adult SASM guideline and current UK CPOC pathway support recognition and team communication, but their scores and management branches remain for qualified use in their setting. Document the source and ask what further assessment is needed; the course neither diagnoses obstructive sleep apnea nor teaches a screening cut-off, automatic sleep-study delay, or equipment plan. SASM OSA guideline; CPOC adult OSA pathway.
  • VTE history and setting: Previous thrombosis, relevant treatment, and the proposed inpatient or outpatient setting are questions for the qualified team. NICE NG89 addresses hospital-acquired VTE; the ASPS plastic-surgery reference is for hospitalized patients. Neither authorizes copying a score or prophylaxis regimen to all elective outpatient cases. NICE VTE guidance; ASPS hospitalized VTE reference.
  • Bleeding concerns alongside thrombosis: A history of unusual bleeding, reported medicines, or a prior clot cannot be reduced to one “low” or “high” label. Both sides of the risk question require authorized assessment and an individualized decision; the learner records them separately and avoids medication or prophylaxis instructions. NICE VTE guidance; ACS medication information.
Independent fictional exercise

Fictional adult Farah reports newly reduced walking tolerance, a partner's observation of breathing pauses during sleep, a clot treated years ago, and easy bruising. The proposed setting is outpatient, but a template imports a hospital VTE score and says “routine prophylaxis approved.” Create four distinct question-and-owner rows, a setting-limit note, and a corrected provisional status.

Pass criteria: Pass only if all four reports remain visible, new functional change is routed through the appropriate prompt clinical pathway, sleep observations remain unconfirmed, both VTE and bleeding questions are retained, and the hospitalized-source limitation is explicit. The response must not calculate a score, diagnose sleep apnea, select a test or prophylaxis, alter medication, or pronounce fitness. Completion of this lesson and the Module 2 checkpoint ends Foundation.

Selected reading

Module checkpoint

Module 2 checkpoint — A signal is not an order: Fictional adult Karim has a proposed outpatient procedure. A generic checklist requests every routine test, records a new decline in activity, notes nicotine use and low food intake, and includes a partner's report of breathing pauses plus a past clot. A staff note copies a hospitalized plastic-surgery VTE recommendation and calls the case “optimized.” Produce an indication-and-owner matrix, a separate health-factor question list, a two-sentence evidence-limit note, and a provisional pathway status. Pass only if the response avoids blanket tests, identifies the new change for prompt qualified review, keeps nutrition and nicotine questions individual, treats sleep observations as reported, makes inpatient versus outpatient limits explicit, and does not calculate a risk score, prescribe prophylaxis or abstinence, or declare optimization or clearance. Foundation ends here after lessons 1–6.

Module 03 · Lessons 7–8

Qualified Review and Accountable Handoff

Use the information gathered so far to keep an elective pathway provisional while qualified clinicians resolve material questions. A safe handoff has a recipient, an action or review question, and evidence that it was received or remains outstanding.

Two adults in a clinic-like work area hold opposite sides of a closed, unmarked cream envelope; one wears olive scrubs and the other a charcoal cardigan.
Illustrative handoff of an unresolved question; exchange alone does not show receipt, review, or clearance.
07Referral, Deferral, and Questions for OptimizationFull course

Learning objective

Given a fictional unresolved finding, write a qualified-review route with an owner, reason, requested information, and provisional status, without directing referral, treatment, or deferral for a real adult.

In this lesson

  • Match the question to the professional: The surgeon, anesthesia professional, primary or specialty clinician, and coordinator have different roles. Known or suspected sleep apnea belongs in a team-owned perioperative pathway; a possible prior perioperative hypersensitivity event may need a specialist allergy referral with available anesthesia records. The learner identifies which perspective is missing and what information it needs without making a diagnosis or personally directing care. ASA standards; CPOC adult OSA pathway; NICE drug-allergy guidance; BSACI perioperative allergy referral.
  • Optimization is a question, not a recipe: A healing concern, unstable symptom, medicine discrepancy, diabetes history, or missing consultation may call for additional assessment and possibly a plan from an authorized clinician. Record the specific uncertainty and what qualified advice is requested; do not set a target, prescribe therapy, or imply every factor can be fully eliminated. NICE perioperative care; CPOC diabetes guideline; NICE surgical-site infection.
  • Provisional pathways include pause: Elective surgery may remain unconfirmed while significant information is reviewed. The treating surgeon and anesthesia team decide their parts of whether and when care can proceed under local practice; a course learner does not independently approve, cancel, or impose a fixed postponement rule. RCS surgical practice; ASA practice advisory.
  • Close the loop on consultation: An unanswered request, a report outside its time or scope, or a recommendation not yet reviewed cannot be marked resolved. A status register should show recipient, date, response, remaining question, and who will revisit the proposed plan. RCS team safety; GMC cosmetic communication.
Independent fictional exercise

Fictional adult Gio reports a new respiratory symptom after scheduling, while a prior consultation letter addresses only an older skin concern. A coordinator writes “specialist cleared for surgery” and keeps the planned date. Draft a four-row issue/owner/needed-review/status register and a neutral message to the treating team.

Pass criteria: Pass only if the response recognizes that the prior letter does not cover the new symptom, routes the change through the appropriate local qualified pathway promptly, assigns ownership of any elective timing decision to the responsible clinicians, and leaves the status provisional. It must not diagnose Gio, specify treatment or testing, portray the older letter as global clearance, or personally order deferral.

Selected reading

08Documenting Findings, Handoffs, and ReassessmentFull course

Learning objective

Produce a dated fictional handoff that distinguishes source, finding, open question, responsible reviewer, communication status, and trigger for reassessment.

In this lesson

  • A legible source trail: Preserve who reported an item, the date of a document, what a qualified professional actually concluded, and what remains unverified. A copied “normal” or “cleared” field cannot replace the context and scope of its source. ASA standards; RCS team safety.
  • Handoff with a named recipient: Record each unresolved issue, why it matters to the planned pathway, the qualified role that must review it, how the message was sent, and whether a response was received. A pending referral or unread result remains open rather than silently becoming approval. RCS team safety; RCS surgical practice.
  • Reassessment after change: A new symptom, therapy change, altered procedure or setting, newly available result, or amended allergy or diabetes record may change the relevant questions. State what requires a renewed conversation with the treating surgeon or anesthesia team under local policy without inventing a universal number of days before surgery. ASA standards; NICE drug-allergy guidance; CPOC diabetes guideline.
  • A careful closing status: The educational summary ends with current status, unresolved dependencies, and responsibility for the next review. Completion of a handoff exercise proves only that communication elements are present; it is not clinical clearance, consent, or a substitute for final professional documentation. RCS team safety; GMC cosmetic communication.
Independent fictional exercise

Fictional adult Hana's intake says “no medicines or allergies,” but a later call reports a new prescription and an uncertain past reaction. A test requested by a qualified clinician is pending, and the proposed procedure setting has changed. Prepare a dated handoff with separate source, recipient, response-status, and reassessment fields; correct a draft line saying “all checks complete.”

Pass criteria: Pass only if the response records both updates and the contradiction, identifies who must review the medicine, reaction, pending result, and changed setting, marks the communication or result as open until reviewed, and specifies a recheck before the proposed operation. It must not interpret the pending result, manage medicines, certify the reaction, or mark Hana cleared.

Selected reading

Module checkpoint

Module 3 checkpoint — No issue disappears at handoff: Fictional adult Leila has an elective date. Her initial history has a medicine discrepancy and a prior anesthesia concern; a new symptom was reported after the initial review. A requested consultation has no reply, and the procedure setting has changed. A summary claims “preoperative assessment complete.” Produce a dated evidence-and-provenance table, a handoff register with each issue's professional owner and receipt status, a reassessment trigger list, and a corrected pathway statement. Pass only if every new or unresolved item stays open until a qualified reviewer addresses it; the surgeon and anesthesia responsibilities are visible; the pending consultation is not treated as clearance; and the changed symptom and setting trigger renewed review. The answer must not make a diagnosis, order a test, change treatment, choose anesthesia, approve the operation, or independently decide its deferral.

Selected reading · 20 sources

Independent case-based study

Trace the source.
Name the question.
Keep it open.

The displayed curriculum contains eight measurable objectives, 32 developed topics, eight independent fictional exercises with pass criteria, three module checkpoints and 20 source-mapped readings. Learners can work through the questions in their own notes. Current delivery details and access timing are supplied by email before payment.

  1. Build a source-aware recordKeep the adult's report and dated prior documents distinct from a current professional finding.
  2. Define a focused questionAsk which qualified reviewer can interpret a concern, test, consultation or changed fact.
  3. Record the handoffTrack ownership, reply status and reassessment rather than closing a question on referral alone.
A man studies alone at a library table with a pen over a blank notebook beside an open laptop whose screen is hidden from view.
An illustrative moment of independent study. The setting and objects do not specify course delivery or included materials.

Fictional case exercises

Keep the facts.
Keep the questions open.

Each displayed lesson gives a fictional prompt and pass criteria; each module closes with a synthesis checkpoint. Learners make their own notes. These are educational cases, not real-patient records, clinical forms or clearance tools.

Role and timing map

Dated baseline with sources

Medicine and reaction discrepancy list

Question-led testing audit

Health-factor and owner register

Accountable handoff and reassessment log

Two course packages

Choose your level of study.

One-time package price in USD.
Current delivery details and access timing are confirmed by email before payment.

Lessons 1–6 · Modules 1–2

Foundation package

$19USD · one-time

Build a source-aware baseline and frame questions for selective professional evaluation of health factors.

  • Lessons 1–3: roles, history, medicines and prior events
  • Lessons 4–6: focused evaluation and health-factor questions
  • Six independent fictional exercises with pass criteria
  • First two module checkpoints
  • Mapped reading for lessons 1–6
Choose the $19 package

All 8 lessons · 3 modules

Full course

$29USD · one-time

The complete curriculum adds qualified referral questions, accountable handoff and reassessment when information changes.

  • Everything in the Foundation package
  • Lessons 7–8: referral, handoff and reassessment
  • Eight independent fictional exercises with pass criteria
  • All three module checkpoints
  • Source-mapped reading across the full curriculum
Choose the $29 package
01

Choose a package
and complete the form.

02

Review delivery details
and access timing by email before payment.

03

Payment and access
are arranged manually after you confirm the details.

Course application

Start with a
clearer record.

Leave your name and email. We will send payment details manually with current delivery and access timing for review before payment.

We email payment and current delivery details manually. Confirm access timing before payment.

Course questions

Before you
start learning.

Have another question?
Contact us

Who is this course for?

It is intended for appropriately qualified plastic-surgery and perioperative clinicians, supervised advanced trainees, clinical coordinators, and educators working within their roles in adult elective plastic surgery.

What does each package cover?

The $19 USD Foundation package covers lessons 1–6, modules 1–2, six fictional exercises and two checkpoints. The $29 USD Full course covers all eight lessons, three modules, eight exercises and three checkpoints, adding qualified referral, handoff and reassessment.

Does completing an exercise clear someone for surgery?

No. The cases are fictional. A booking, form, normal result or educational checkpoint cannot determine a real adult's fitness or consent. Patient-specific decisions belong to the responsible qualified team.

Does the course prescribe a standard test panel or medicine schedule?

No. It asks what question a qualified professional needs to answer. It supplies no universal testing panel, medication hold or restart plan, laboratory threshold, risk score, prophylaxis regimen or fixed deferral rule.

How are new symptoms or pending consultations handled?

The fictional exercises keep new and unresolved information open with a named professional owner and documented response status. Real-world concerns require the appropriate local clinical pathway rather than a course-derived triage rule.

Are UK and US references universal rules?

No. The reading list identifies population, setting and jurisdiction limits. Learners must apply their own professional scope and local standards; hospitalized guidance does not automatically apply to an outpatient cosmetic procedure.

Are faculty, recordings or certificates included?

The displayed curriculum contains fictional exercises, checkpoints and source-mapped reading. Faculty, recordings, duration, access period, certificates and accreditation have not been confirmed; current delivery details are supplied by email before payment.

How do I apply and get access?

Choose a package and submit your name and email. We send payment details manually with current delivery and access timing for review before payment. Submitting the form does not provide instant access.

Do the illustrations show real patients or completed assessments?

No. All six images are fictional editorial artwork. They show neither a real patient record, a clinical decision, health clearance nor a verified course feature.