ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The transfer validity of portable laparoscopy simulation is well established. However, attempts to integrate take-home simulation into surgical training have met with inconsistent engagement worldwide, as for example in our 2014-15 study of an Incentivised Laparoscopy Practice programme (ILPv1). Drawing on learning from our subsequent multi-centre study examining barriers and facilitators, we revised the programme for 2018 onwards. We now report on engagement with the 2018-2022 versions of this home-based simulation programme (ILP v2.1-2.3). METHODS: In ILP v2.1-2.3, three consecutive year-groups of new-start Core Surgical Trainees (n = 48, 46 and 53) were loaned portable simulators. The 6-month education programme included induction, technical support, and intermittent feedback. Six tasks were prescribed, with video instruction and charting of metric scores. Video uploads were required and scored by faculty. A pass resulted in an eCertificate, expected at Annual Review (but not mandatory for progression). ILP was set within a wider reform, "Improving Surgical Training". RESULTS: ILP v2.1-2.3 saw pass rates of 94%, 76% and 70% respectively (45/48, 35/46 and 37/53 trainees), compared with only 26% (7/27) in ILP v1, despite now including some trainees not intending careers in laparoscopic specialties. The ILP v2.2 group all reported their engagement with the whole simulation strategy was hampered by the COVID19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Simply providing take-home simulators, no matter how good, is not enough. To achieve trainee engagement, a whole programme is required, with motivated learners, individual and group practice, intermittent feedback, and clear goals and assessments. ILP is a complex intervention, best understood as a "reform within a reform, within a context."
ABSTRACT
Craft specialties such as surgery endured widespread disruption to postgraduate education and training during the pandemic. Despite the expansive literature on rapid adaptations and innovations, generalisability of these descriptions is limited by scarce use of theory-driven methods. In this research, we explored UK surgical trainees' (n = 46) and consultant surgeons' (trainers, n = 25) perceptions of how learning in clinical environments changed during a time of extreme uncertainty (2020/2021). Our ultimate goal was to identify new ideas that could shape post-pandemic surgical training. We conducted semi-structured virtual interviews with participants from a range of working/training environments across thirteen Health Boards in Scotland. Initial analysis of interview transcripts was inductive. Dynamic capabilities theory (how effectively an organisation uses its resources to respond to environmental changes) and its micro-foundations (sensing, seizing, reconfiguring) were used for subsequent theory-driven analysis. Findings demonstrate that surgical training responded dynamically and adapted to external and internal environmental uncertainty. Sensing threats and opportunities in the clinical environment prompted trainers' institutions to seize new ways of working. Learners gained from reconfigured training opportunities (e.g., splitting operative cases between trainees), pan-surgical working (e.g., broader surgical exposure), redeployment (e.g., to medical specialties), collaborative working (working with new colleagues and in new ways) and supervision (shifting to online supervision). Our data foreground the human resource and structural reconfigurations, and technological innovations that effectively maintained surgical training during the pandemic, albeit in different ways. These adaptations and innovations could provide the foundations for enhancing surgical education and training in the post-pandemic era.