Surgery Clerkship Directors' Perceptions of the COVID-19 Pandemic's Impact on Medical Student Education.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the national impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the education of medical students assigned to surgery clerkship rotations, as reported by surgery clerkship directors(CDs). STUDY DESIGN: In the spring of 2020 and 2021, the authors surveyed 164 CDs from 144 LCME-accredited US medical schools regarding their views of the pandemic's impact on the surgery clerkship curriculum, students' experiences, outcomes, and institutional responses. RESULTS: Overall survey response rates, calculated as no. respondents/no. surveyed were 44.5%(73/164) and 50.6%(83/164) for the spring 2020 and 2021 surveys, respectively. Nearly all CDs(>95%) pivoted to virtual platforms and solutions. Most returned to some form of in-person learning by winter 2020, and pre-pandemic status by spring 2021(46%, 38/83). Students' progression to the next year was delayed by 12%(9/73), and preparation was negatively impacted by 45%(37/83). Despite these data, CDs perceived students' interest in surgical careers was not significantly affected(89% vs. 77.0%, p=0.09). Over the one-year study, the proportion of CDs reporting a severe negative impact on the curriculum dropped significantly(p<0.0001) for most parameters assessed except summative evaluations(40.3% vs. 45.7%,p=0.53). CDs(n=83) also noted the pandemic's positive impact with respect to virtual patient encounters(21.7%), didactics(16.9%), student test performance(16.9%), continuous personal learning(14.5%), engagement in the clerkship(9.6%) and student interest in surgery as a career(7.2%). CONCLUSION: During the pandemic, the severe negative impact on student educational programs lessened and novel virtual curricular solutions emerged. Student interest in surgery as a career was sustained. Measures of student competency and effectiveness of new curriculum, including telehealth, remain areas for future investigation.

One-Year Follow-Up of COVID-19 Impact on Surgical Education: Clinical Training Restored but Surgical Trainee Emotional Well-Being Still at Risk.

BACKGROUND: A previous survey documented the severe disruption of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on surgical education and trainee well-being during the initial surge and systemic lockdowns. Herein, we report the results of a follow-up survey inclusive of the 2020 to 2021 academic year. STUDY DESIGN: A survey was distributed to education leaders across all surgical specialties in summer 2021. We compared the proportion of participants reporting severe disruption in key areas with those of the spring 2020 survey. Aggregated differences by year were assessed using chi-square analysis. RESULTS: In 2021, severe disruption of education programs was reported by 14% compared with 32% in 2020 (p < 0.0001). Severe reductions in nonemergency surgery were reported by 38% compared with 87% of respondents in 2020. Severe disruption of expected progression of surgical trainee autonomy by rank also significantly decreased to 5% to 8% in 2021 from 15% to 23% in 2020 among respondent programs (p < 0.001). In 2021 clinical remediation was reported for postgraduate year 1 to 2 and postgraduate year 3 to 4, typically through revised rotations (19% and 26%) and additional use of simulation (20% and 19%) maintaining trainee promotion and job placement. In 2021, surgical trainees' physical safety and health were reported as less severely impacted compared with 2020; however, negative effects of isolation (77%), burnout (75%), and the severe impact on emotional well-being (17%) were prevalent. CONCLUSIONS: One year after the initial coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak, clinical training and surgical trainee health were less negatively impacted. Disruption of emotional well-being remained high. Future needs include better objective measures of clinical competence beyond case numbers and the implementation of novel programs to promote surgical trainee health and well-being.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical trainee education and well-being spring 2020-winter 2020: A path forward.

BACKGROUND: The time course and longitudinal impact of the COVID -19 pandemic on surgical education(SE) and learner well-being (LWB)is unknown. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Check-in surveys were distributed to Surgery Program Directors and Department Chairs, including general surgery and surgical specialties, in the summer and winter of 2020 and compared to a survey from spring 2020. Statistical associations for items with self-reported ACGME Stage and the survey period were assessed using categorical analysis. RESULTS: Stage 3 institutions were reported in spring (30%), summer (4%) [p < 0.0001] and increased in the winter (18%). Severe disruption (SD) was stage dependent (Stage 3; 45% (83/184) vs. Stages 1 and 2; 26% (206/801)[p < 0.0001]). This lessened in the winter (23%) vs. spring (32%) p = 0.02. LWB severe disruption was similar in spring 27%, summer 22%, winter 25% and was associated with Stage 3. CONCLUSIONS: Steps taken during the pandemic reduced SD but did not improve LWB. Systemic efforts are needed to protect learners and combat isolation pervasive in a pandemic.

Lived Experiences of Surgical Residents During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Assessment.

OBJECTIVE: As the COVID-19 pandemic dynamically changes our society, it is important to consider how the pandemic has affected the training and wellness of surgical residents. Using a qualitative study of national focus groups with general surgery residents, we aim to identify common themes surrounding their personal, clinical, and educational experiences that could be used to inform practice and policy for future pandemics and disasters. DESIGN: Six 90-minute focus groups were conducted by a trained qualitative researcher who elicited responses on six predetermined topics. De-identified transcripts and audio recordings were later analyzed by two independent researchers who organized responses to each topic into themes. SETTING: Focus groups were conducted virtually and anonymously. PARTICIPANTS: General surgery residents were recruited from across the country. Demographic information of potential participants was coded, and subjects were randomly selected to ensure a diverse group of participants. RESULTS: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on residents' clinical, educational, and personal experiences varied depending on the institutional response of the program and the burden of COVID-19 cases geographically. Many successes were identified: the use of telehealth and virtual didactics, an increased sense of camaraderie amongst residents, and flexibility in scheduling. Many challenges were also identified: uncertainty at work regarding personal protective equipment and scheduling, decreased case volume and educational opportunities, and emotional trauma and burnout associated with the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: These data gathered from our qualitative study highlight a clear, urgent need for thoughtful institutional planning and policies for the remainder of this and future pandemics. Residency programs must ensure a balanced training program for surgical residents as they attempt to master the skills of their craft while also serving as employed health care providers in a pandemic. Furthermore, a focus on wellness, in addition to clinical competency and education, is vital to resident resilience and success in a pandemic setting.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Surgical Training and Learner Well-Being: Report of a Survey of General Surgery and Other Surgical Specialty Educators.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the delivery of surgical services. The purpose of this communication was to report the impact of the pandemic on surgical training and learner well-being and to document adaptations made by surgery departments. STUDY DESIGN: A 37-item survey was distributed to educational leaders in general surgery and other surgical specialty training programs. It included both closed- and open-ended questions and the self-reported stages of GME during the COVID-19 pandemic, as defined by the ACGME. Statistical associations for items with stage were assessed using categorical analysis. RESULTS: The response rate was 21% (472 of 2,196). US stage distribution (n = 447) was as follows: stage 1, 22%; stage 2, 48%; and stage 3, 30%. Impact on clinical education significantly increased by stage, with severe reductions in nonemergency operations (73% and 86% vs 98%) and emergency operations (8% and 16% vs 34%). Variable effects were reported on minimal expected case numbers across all stages. Reductions were reported in outpatient experience (83%), in-hospital experience (70%), and outside rotations (57%). Increases in ICU rotations were reported with advancing stage (7% and 13% vs 37%). Severity of impact on didactic education increased with stage (14% and 30% vs 46%). Virtual conferences were adopted by 97% across all stages. Severity of impact on learner well-being increased by stage-physical safety (6% and 9% vs 31%), physical health (0% and 7% vs 17%), and emotional health (11% and 24% vs 42%). Regardless of stage, most but not all made adaptations to support trainees' well-being. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic adversely impacted surgical training and the well-being of learners across all surgical specialties proportional to increasing ACGME stage. There is a need to develop education disaster plans to support technical competency and learner well-being. Careful assessment for program advancement will also be necessary. The experience during this pandemic shows that virtual learning and telemedicine will have a considerable impact on the future of surgical education.

The Challenges of Program Accreditation Decisions in 2021 for the ACMGE Review Committee for Surgery.

Through only a few months, the COVID-19 pandemic has greatly impacted the daily activities and education of surgical residents and fellows and the programs in which they are enrolled. The pandemic has also forced many changes for the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and its Review Committee for Surgery. This article details some of those changes and their effect on the process of conferring 2021 accreditation decisions by the Review Committee.

Pediatric Modification of the Medically Necessary, Time-Sensitive Scoring System for Operating Room Procedure Prioritization During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic forced surgeons to reconsider concepts of "elective" operations. Perceptions about the time sensitivity and medical necessity of a procedure have taken on greater significance during the pandemic. The evolving ethical and clinical environment requires reappraisal of perioperative factors, such as personal protective equipment conservation; limiting the risk of exposure to COVID-19 for patients, families, and healthcare workers; preservation of hospital beds and ICU resources; and minimizing COVID-19-related perioperative risk to patients. STUDY DESIGN: A scaffold for the complex decision-making required for prioritization of medically necessary, time-sensitive (MeNTS) operations was developed for adult patients by colleagues at the University of Chicago. Although adult MeNTS scoring can be applied across adult surgical specialties, some variables were irrelevant in a pediatric population. Pediatric manifestations of chronic diseases and congenital anomalies were not accounted for. To account for the unique challenges children face, we modified the adult MeNTS system for use across pediatric subspecialties. RESULTS: This pediatric MeNTS scoring system was applied to 101 cases both performed and deferred between March 23 and April 19, 2020 at the University of Chicago Comer Children's Hospital. The pediatric MeNTS scores provide a safe, equitable, transparent, and ethical strategy to prioritize children's surgical procedures. CONCLUSIONS: This process is adaptable to individual institutions and we project it will be useful during the acute phase of the pandemic (maximal limitations), as well as the anticipated recovery phase.

Medically Necessary, Time-Sensitive Procedures: Scoring System to Ethically and Efficiently Manage Resource Scarcity and Provider Risk During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Hospitals have severely curtailed the performance of nonurgent surgical procedures in anticipation of the need to redeploy healthcare resources to meet the projected massive medical needs of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Surgical treatment of non-COVID-19 related disease during this period, however, still remains necessary. The decision to proceed with medically necessary, time-sensitive (MeNTS) procedures in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic requires incorporation of factors (resource limitations, COVID-19 transmission risk to providers and patients) heretofore not overtly considered by surgeons in the already complicated processes of clinical judgment and shared decision-making. We describe a scoring system that systematically integrates these factors to facilitate decision-making and triage for MeNTS procedures, and appropriately weighs individual patient risks with the ethical necessity of optimizing public health concerns. This approach is applicable across a broad range of hospital settings (academic and community, urban and rural) in the midst of the pandemic and may be able to inform case triage as operating room capacity resumes once the acute phase of the pandemic subsides.

What Is the Appropriate Use of Laparoscopy over Open Procedures in the Current COVID-19 Climate?

INTRODUCTION: Among surgeons worldwide, a concern with the use of minimally invasive techniques has been raised due to a proposed risk of viral transmission of the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) with the creation of pneumoperitoneum. Due to this proposed concern, we sought to collect the available data and evaluate the use of laparoscopy and the risk of COVID-19 transmission. METHODS: A literature review of viral transmission in surgery and of the available literature regarding the transmission of the COVID-19 virus was performed. We additionally reviewed surgical society guidelines and recommendations regarding surgery during this pandemic. RESULTS: Few studies have been performed on viral transmission during surgery, but to date there is no study that demonstrates or can suggest the ability for a virus to be transmitted during surgical treatment whether open or laparoscopic. There is no societal consensus on limiting or restricting laparoscopic or robotic surgery; however, there is expert consensus on the modification of standard practices to minimize any risk of transmission. CONCLUSIONS: Despite very little evidence to support viral transmission through laparoscopic or open approaches, we recommend making modifications to surgical practice such as the use of smoke evacuation and minimizing energy device use among other measures to minimize operative staff exposure to aerosolized particles.