Strategies for New Skill Acquisition by Practicing Surgeons.

OBJECTIVE: To understand how practicing surgeons utilize available training methods, which methods are perceived as effective, and important barriers to using more effective methods. DESIGN: Online survey designed to characterize surgeon utilization and perception of available training methods. SETTING: Two large Midwestern academic health centers. PARTICIPANTS: 150 faculty surgeons. METHODS: Nominal values were compared using a McNemar's Test and Likert-like values were compared using a paired t-test (IBM SPSS Statistics v. 21.0; New York, NY). RESULTS: Survey response rate was 81% (122/150). 98% of surgeons reported learning a new procedure or technology after formal training. Many surgeons reported scrubbing in expert cases (78%) and self-directed study (66%), while few surgeons (6%) completed a mini-fellowship. The modalities used most commonly were scrubbing in expert cases (34%) and self-directed study (27%). Few surgeons (7%) believed self-directed study would be most effective, whereas 31% and 16% believed operating under supervision and mini-fellowships would be most effective, respectively. Surgeons believed more effective methods "would require too much time" or they had "confidence in their ability to implement safely." CONCLUSIONS: Practicing surgeons use a variety of training methods when learning new procedures and technologies, and there is disconnect between commonly used training methods and those deemed most effective. Confidence in surgeon's ability was cited as a reason for this discrepancy; and surgeons found time associated with more effective methods to be prohibitive.

Safety considerations in learning new procedures: a survey of surgeons.

BACKGROUND: There exists a tension between surgical innovation and safety. The learning curve associated with the introduction of new procedures/technologies has been associated with preventable patient harm. Surgeon's perceptions regarding the safety of methods for learning new procedures/technologies are largely uncharacterized. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey was designed to evaluate surgeons' perceptions related to learning new procedures/technologies. This included clinical vignettes across two domains: (1) experience with an operation (e.g., colectomy) and (2) experience with a technology (e.g., laparoscopy). This study also focuses on a surgeon's perceptions of existing credentialing/privileging requirements. Participants were faculty surgeons (n = 150) at two large Midwestern academic health centers. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 77% (116/150). 69% of respondents believed the processes of credentialing/privileging is "far too relaxed" or "too relaxed" for ensuring patient safety. Surgeons most commonly indicated a mini-fellowship is required to learn a new laparoscopic procedure. However, that requirement differed based on a surgeon's prior experience with laparoscopy. For example, to learn laparoscopic colectomy, 35% of respondents felt a surgeon with limited laparoscopic experience should complete a mini-fellowship, whereas 3% felt this was necessary if the surgeon had extensive laparoscopic experience. In the latter scenario, most respondents felt a surgeon should scrub in cases performed by an expert (38%) or perform cases under a proctor's supervision (33%) when learning laparoscopic colectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Many surgeons believe existing hospital credentialing/privileging practices may be too relaxed. Moreover, surgeons believe the "one-size-fits-all" approach for training practicing surgeons may not protect patients from unsafe introduction of new procedures/technologies.

Evaluation of Feedback Systems for the Third-Year Surgical Clerkship.

OBJECTIVE: To compare faculty-to-student feedback rates from 2 different data sets: direct observation cards (direct evidence) and end-of-clerkship questionnaires (ECQs, secondary student reporting). We as authors hypothesized that direct evidence from observation cards would yield higher rates of feedback, compared with student-reported ECQs. DESIGN: Data were gathered from 2 consecutive medical classes of the third-year surgical clerkship. Data were analyzed retrospectively. Subjects and authors were blinded during data collection and analysis. SETTING: University of Michigan Medical School (UMMS) and University of Michigan Health System (UMHS). UMHS is an academic tertiary care center, located in Ann Arbor, Michigan. PARTICIPANTS: Data were gathered from all third-year medical students completing the surgical clerkship from 2012 to 2014. Data were available for 309 students, compared to 313 students who graduated from UMMS during that time. RESULTS: Directly measured rates of feedback showed higher rates of midclerkship feedback (95.43% vs 83.57%, p < 0.05), feedback on an observed history-taking (97.62% vs 84.87%, p < 0.05), and feedback on an observed physical examination (99.67% vs 79.71%, p < 0.05), when compared with the ECQ. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that solely using ECQs to assess feedback rates may be inadequate. The use of multiple methods to assess feedback may therefore be a prudent choice for surgical clerkships.