Attrition Rate in Military General Surgery GME and Effect on Quality of Military Programs.

INTRODUCTION: The attrition rate in civilian general surgery Graduate Medical Education (GME) is estimated at 20%, while estimates of attrition in military general surgery (MGS) GME programs using the same methodology are nearly twice that. We sought to identify the true attrition rate in MGS GME, identify factors influencing attrition, and examine the relationship between attrition and quality of MGS GME. METHODS: Deidentified data were collected on categorical general surgery residents matriculating from 2010 to 2013 from all 12 MGS residency programs. Information gathered included gender, medical degree, marital status, location of program, presence of a military-related interruption in training, and age at start of the categorical contract. For those who did not graduate, data on postgraduate year at time of attrition, reasons for attrition, and deficiencies in core competencies were solicited. To assess the effect of true attrition rate on graduate performance, we compared the published 5-year American Board of Surgery qualifying exam/certifying exam first time pass rates between military and civilian programs. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-four categorical residents matriculated from 2010 to 2013. Fifty six (31.5 %) were women, 151 (62.1%) were MD's, 103 (56%) were married, 172 (93.5%) were less than 35 years old, and 33 (17.9%) had a military-related interruption in training. Nineteen individuals left residency prior to graduation (15 resigned, 2 resigned in lieu of termination, 2 terminated) for an overall attrition rate of 10.3%. The most common year for attrition was PGY-3 (31.6%) and most common reason for resignation was changing to a different subspecialty (73.3%). Men and women had equal attrition rates (10.3%), and there was no meaningful difference between MD's and DO's (9.9% vs 12.1%, p = 0.71) or region of training (10.6% East vs 9.1% West, p = 0.73). However, those who were not married, had a militarily mandated interruption in training and started their categorical training over the age of 35 had higher attrition rates (married 5.6%, not married 15%, p = 0.04, interruption 16% vs no interruption 9%, p = 0.1; Age ≥ 35 33.3% vs age < 35 6.7%, p < 0.01). Comparison of American Board of Surgery (ABS) first time pass rates over a similar time period showed that military programs performed statistically discernibly better than civilian programs (82% ± 12 vs 75% ± 13, p = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: Previous used methodology over estimates the attrition rate in MGS GME. The lower rate in MGS programs results in a high level of graduate performance as measured by ABS pass rates. Interruption in training and especially marital status and age ≥ 35 appear to be potential predictors of attrition. Components of MGS GME training and selection processes might inform efforts to reduce attrition and improve performance in civilian surgical GME.

The Effect of Patient Education on the Perceptions of Resident Participation in Surgical Care.

OBJECTIVE: To decipher if patient attitudes toward resident participation in their surgical care can be improved with patient education regarding resident roles, education, and responsibilities. DESIGN: An anonymous questionnaire was created and distributed in outpatient surgery clinics that had residents involved with patient care. In total, 3 groups of patients were surveyed, a control group and 2 intervention groups. Each intervention group was given an informational pamphlet explaining the role, education, and responsibilities of residents. The first pamphlet used an analogy-based explanation. The second pamphlet used literature citations and statistics. SETTING: Keesler Medical Center, Keesler AFB, MS. University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 454 responses were collected and analyzed-211 in the control group, 118 in the analogy pamphlet group, and 125 in the statistics pamphlet group. RESULTS: Patients had favorable views of residents assisting with their surgical procedures, and the majority felt that outcomes were the same or better regardless of whether they read an informational pamphlet. Of all the patients surveyed, 80% agreed or strongly agreed that they expect to be asked permission for residents to be involved in their care. Further, 52% of patients in the control group agreed or strongly agreed to a fifth-year surgery resident operating on them independently for routine procedures compared to 62% and 65% of the patients who read the analogy pamphlet and statistics pamphlet, respectively (p = 0.05). When we combined the 2 intervention groups compared to the control group, this significant difference persisted (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Most patients welcome resident participation in their surgical care, but they expect to be asked permission for resident involvement. Patient education using an information pamphlet describing resident roles, education, and responsibilities improved patient willingness to allow a chief resident to operate independently.

Multi-institutional study of self-reported attitudes and behaviors of general surgery residents about ethical academic practices in test taking.

PURPOSE: Correlation exists between people who engage in academic dishonesty as students and unethical behavior once in practice. Previously, we assessed the attitudes of general surgery residents and ethical practices in test taking at a single institution. Most residents had not participated in activities they felt were unethical, yet what constituted unethical behavior was unclear. We sought to verify these results in a multi-institutional study. METHODS: A scenario-based survey describing potentially unethical activities related to the American Board of Surgery In-training Examination (ABSITE) was administered. Participants were asked about their knowledge of or participation in the activities and whether the activity was unethical. Program directors were surveyed about the use of ABSITE results for resident evaluation and promotion. RESULTS: Ten programs participated in the study. The resident response rate was 67% (186/277). Of the respondents, 43% felt that memorizing questions to study for future examinations was unethical and 50% felt that using questions another resident memorized was unethical. Most felt that buying (86%) or selling (79%) questions was unethical. Significantly more senior than junior residents have memorized (30% vs 16%; p = 0.04) or used questions others memorized (33% vs 12%; p = 0.002) to study for future ABSITE examinations and know of other residents who have done so (42% vs 20%; p = 0.004). Most programs used results of the ABSITE in promotion (80%) and set minimum score expectations and consequences (70%). CONCLUSION: Similar to our single-institution study, residents had not participated in activities they felt to be unethical; however the definition of what constitutes cheating remains unclear. Differences were identified between senior and junior residents with regard to memorizing questions for study. Cheating and unethical behavior is not always clear to the learner and represents an area for further education.