Fundamental Use of Surgical Energy (FUSE) certification: validation and predictors of success.

INTRODUCTION: The Fundamental Use of Surgical Energy (FUSE) program includes a Web-based didactic curriculum and a high-stakes multiple-choice question examination with the goal to provide certification of knowledge on the safe use of surgical energy-based devices. The purpose of this study was (1) to set a passing score through a psychometrically sound process and (2) to determine what pretest factors predicted passing the FUSE examination. METHODS: Beta-testing of multiple-choice questions on 62 topics of importance to the safe use of surgical energy-based devices was performed. Eligible test takers were physicians with a minimum of 1 year of surgical training who were recruited by FUSE task force members. A pretest survey collected baseline information. RESULTS: A total of 227 individuals completed the FUSE beta-test, and 208 completed the pretest survey. The passing/cut score for the first test form of the FUSE multiple-choice examination was determined using the modified Angoff methodology and for the second test form was determined using a linear equating methodology. The overall passing rate across the two examination forms was 81.5%. Self-reported time studying the FUSE Web-based curriculum for a minimum of >2 h was associated with a passing examination score (p < 0.001). Performance was not different based on increased years of surgical practice (p = 0.363), self-reported expertise on one or more types of energy-based devices (p = 0.683), participation in the FUSE postgraduate course (p = 0.426), or having reviewed the FUSE manual (p = 0.428). Logistic regression found that studying the FUSE didactics for >2 h predicted a passing score (OR 3.61; 95% CI 1.44-9.05; p = 0.006) independent of the other baseline characteristics recorded. CONCLUSION(S): The development of the FUSE examination, including the passing score, followed a psychometrically sound process. Self-reported time studying the FUSE curriculum predicted a passing score independent of other pretest characteristics such as years in practice and self-reported expertise.

Rationale for the fundamental use of surgical Energy™ (FUSE) curriculum assessment: focus on safety.

BACKGROUND: Almost all surgical procedures involve the use of devices that apply energy to tissue. Adverse events can occur if the devices are not used appropriately. The SAGES' Fundamental Use of Surgical Energy™ (FUSE) program will include a curriculum and certification examination to address this safety issue. The aim of this study was to determine the self-perceived knowledge of practicing surgeons related to energy-based devices and identify areas to emphasize in the assessment component of FUSE. METHODS: Psychometric experts led the test development process. During a 2-day retreat, a multidisciplinary group defined 63 test objectives assessing the knowledge and skills required to use energy-based surgical instruments safely (job task analysis). A survey was sent to a sample of 103 SAGES leaders and others in the test target audience to determine the number of items to use for the certification examination. Participants rated each objective for frequency, relevance, and importance on a 1-7 scale with the means used to create a weighted scale. The survey also included five self-assessment questions. RESULTS: Fifty surveys were completed; only 28 % of respondents considered themselves "experts." The most common source of knowledge was "industry sales representative or course" (42 %). The highest weighted topic was "Prevention of Adverse Events with Electrosurgery." The highest-rated objectives (>6 out of 7) were "Identify various mechanisms whereby electrosurgical injuries may occur," "Identify patient protection measures for setup and settings for the electrosurgical unit," and "Identify circumstances, mechanisms, and prevention of dispersive electrodes-related injury." CONCLUSIONS: Although basic and advanced energy-based devices are commonly used, training has been largely dependent upon industry representatives or industry-sponsored courses. Few surgeons consider themselves experts in the mechanisms of action and the appropriate and safe use of energy-based surgical devices. Competencies that emphasize electrosurgical safety were viewed as most important for the FUSE certification examination.

Surgeons don't know what they don't know about the safe use of energy in surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons are not required to train on energy-based devices or document their knowledge of safety issues related to their use. Their understanding of how to safely use the devices has never formally been tested. This study assessed that knowledge in a cohort of gastrointestinal surgeons and determined if key facts could be learned in a half-day course. METHODS: SAGES piloted a postgraduate CME course on the Fundamental Use of Surgical Energy™ (FUSE) at the 2011 SAGES meeting. Course faculty prepared an 11-item multiple-choice examination (pretest) of critical knowledge. We administered it to members of the SAGES board; Quality, Outcomes and Safety Committee; and FUSE Task Force. Postgraduate course participants took the pretest, and at the end of the course they took a 10-item post-test that covered the same content. Data are expressed as median (interquartile range, IQR). RESULTS: Forty-eight SAGES leaders completed the test: the median percent of correct answers was 59 % (IQR = 55-73 %; range = 0-100 %). Thirty-one percent did not know how to correctly handle a fire on the patient; 31 % could not identify the device least likely to interfere with a pacemaker; 13 % did not know that thermal injury can extend beyond the jaws of a bipolar instrument; and 10 % thought a dispersive pad should be cut to fit a child. Pretest results for 27 participants in the postgraduate course were similar, with a median of 55 % correct (IQR = 46-82 %). Participants were not told the correct answers. At the end of the course, 25 of them completed a different 10-item post-test, with a median of 90 % correct (IQR = 70-90 %). CONCLUSIONS: Many surgeons have knowledge gaps in the safe use of widely used energy-based devices. A formal curriculum in this area can address this gap and contribute to increased safety.