Search

To describe the first year of the Educational Quality Improvement Program (EQIP) DESIGN: The Educational Quality Improvement Program (EQIP) was formed by the Association of Program Directors in Surgery (APDS) in 2018 as a continuous educational quality improvement program. Over 18 months, thirteen discrete goals for the establishment of EQIP were refined and executed through a collaborative effort involving leaders in surgical education. Alpha and beta pilots were conducted to refine the data queries and collection processes. A highly-secure, doubly-deidentified database was created for the ingestion of resident and program data.36 surgical training programs with 1264 trainees and 1500 faculty members were included in the dataset. 51,516 ERAS applications to programs were also included. Uni- and multi-variable analysis was then conducted.EQIP was successfully deployed within the timeline described in 2020. Data from the ACGME, ABS, and ERAS were merged with manually entered data by programs and successfully ingested into the EQIP database. Interactive dashboards have been constructed for use by programs to compare to the national cohort. Risk-adjusted multivariable analysis suggests that increased time in a technical skills lab was associated with increased success on the ABS's Qualifying Examination, alone. Increased time in a technical skills lab and the presence of a formal teaching curriculum were associated with increased success on both the ABS's Qualifying and Certifying Examination. Program type may be of some consequence in predicting success on the Qualifying Examination.The APDS has proved the concept that a highly secure database for the purpose of continuous risk-adjusted quality improvement in surgical education can be successfully deployed. EQIP will continue to improve and hopes to include an increasing number of programs as the barriers to participation are overcome.

OBJECTIVE Surgical departments are increasingly utilizing media to disseminate knowledge, discuss ideas, and mentor future surgeons. Podcasts are a form of media where digitally recorded content can be downloaded or streamed. This study aims (1) to describe the audience reached by a single surgical department podcast and (2) to evaluate what sources of information surgery residency applicants use to formulate a rank list. DESIGN In Fall 2017, the Rocky Mountain Surgery Podcast (RMSP) was created, produced, and edited by 2 general surgery (GS) residents at a large academic training program. Each episode discussed a topic within GS training and/or educational experiences specific to the program. Interviewing GS applicants for the 2019 match were asked to complete an anonymous voluntary survey on their familiarity and opinion of RMSP and the role of podcasts in the application process. RESULTS Twenty-two episodes were completed over a 16-month period (October 4, 2017 - February 11, 2019). A total of 7002 individual listens occurred in 644 cities across 46 states. Ninety-eight interviewing applicants responded to the survey (99% response rate), and one-fourth had previously listened to the RMSP. Only half felt that the traditional interview experience provided enough information about a GS program, and a significant majority (97%) stated they would listen to one or more podcast episodes to gain information regarding a GS residency program. CONCLUSIONS Applicants to GS residency commonly feel inadequate information is gained during the interview process. Podcasts are a tool familiar to applicants that allow for exploration of topics which cannot be adequately addressed in a typical interview day, thus expanding an applicant's knowledge of a GS training program.

Objective To determine if surgeons and non-surgeons agree on the importance of surgical topics covered in the surgical clerkship to the daily practice of non-surgeons. Design An IRB-approved anonymous survey ranking the relative importance of 35 topics drawn from surgical clerkship curricula asking physicians to rank the relative importance of each topic, using a five-point Likert scale, to the daily practice of non-surgeons. Setting Online anonymous survey. Participants Convenience sample of practicing physicians and trainees. The survey was offered to physicians in all specialties via social media and professional connections, responders identified their practice specialty. Results 295 physicians completed the survey. Two hundred thirty-one (85%) were from non-surgical specialties: emergency medicine (EM, n = 100); primary care (PC, n = 71 – included internal medicine, family medicine, and pediatrics); a variety of others (n = 60). Surgeons and non-surgeons agreed on the relative importance of the acute abdomen, breast disease, inguinal hernias, inflammatory bowel disease, morbid obesity, sinusitis, thyroid and parathyroid disease, and wound care; surgeons believed colorectal cancer and diverticulitis to be more important. Surgeons rated all other topics as less important to non-surgeons than non-surgeons. EM rated most acute problems more important that PC; both groups ranked most topics higher importance to the practice of a non-surgeon than surgeons (p Conclusions Surgeons consistently underestimate the importance non-surgeons place on surgical topics in their practice. These results reinforce the perceived importance of a wide exposure to surgery in the surgical clerkship to all medical students – but topics could be focused differently depending on acute or non-acute non-surgical care career plans.

Background Academic general surgery residency programs face a reduction in clinical hours for residents at a time of expanding educational material/clinical programs. To meet these challenges, clinical staffing includes additional faculty, physician extenders, or additional residents. Categorical resident expansion is difficult but there is an ample pool of preliminary first year resident (R1) candidates every match week, and this pool is projected to increase markedly as all medical schools have increased enrollment without any real change to the demographics of available categorical residency positions. Our experience with preliminary R1s without a designated categorical position over the last 8 academic years forms the basis of this report. Methods The University of Colorado-Denver general surgery residency program recruits 8-12 preliminary R1s annually. Most of these are recruited on scramble day, as we found that having individual interview dates for these positions was labor-intensive and did not yield better candidates. Preliminary R1s were mentored in a systematic fashion by the program during the year to focus on career planning. Files for preliminary R1s were reviewed for demographics, medical school of origin, original prematch career goal, successful completion of the intern year, and subsequent categorical residency placement/type. Results We recruited 64 preliminary R1s without a designated categorical position over the past 8 years (16 females and 48 males) with an average age of 30 years old (range 25-45 years). These preliminary R1s attended medical schools throughout the United States (West 24, South 18, Central 11, Northeast 4, or International 7). The average United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 test score was 213 (range 185-252). The majority (95%) completed their preliminary year of training or left for a categorical position during the year. Most preliminary R1s (79%) were successfully placed into categorical training programs at the end of the year, with 23% ultimately receiving categorical training at our institution. Four did not complete their preliminary training year due to medical leave or unsatisfactory performance. The categorical positions preliminary R1s obtained include general surgery (n = 7, 15%), surgical subspecialties (n = 31, 65%), and nonsurgical subspecialties (n = 10, 20%). Ultimately, 14 (29%) of preliminary R1s who matched after 1 year did so in their fields of original interest. Conclusions A symbiotic relationship can exist between a general surgery residency program and preliminary R1s. An approach that focuses on scramble day recruitment, frequent mentorship meetings, and an active role in secondary placement results in successful placement into categorical positions for the vast majority. In that regard, we would argue that we have provided equal career mentorship to these graduated students in comparison with their medical schools of origin.