Sam Minor1, Dan Poenaru. 1. Department of Surgery, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While on surgical rotations, clinical clerks spend more time on the ward and in the emergency department than in any other location. Consequently, their in-house experience is of great importance to their education-yet the teaching processes in these settings have never been fully explored. Unlike the structured pre-clerkship years, the exact breakdown of a clerk's hospital-based education is difficult to elucidate. To effectively evaluate a clerkship curriculum, it is essential to know what clerks are being taught outside of seminars, how that teaching occurs, and by whom. This study proposes a methodology by which a surgical clerkship curriculum can be evaluated. METHODS: For the purpose of the study, surgery clerks carried written and audio logs of their informal teaching encounters during one on-call period (30 hours). These included who taught them, where, by what methods, for how long, and what prompted the teaching. A survey of similar variables was administered to all clerks who rotated through general surgery over 4 months and to all general surgery residents. RESULTS: Four clerks returned completed logs (100% response rate), and 17 clerks (85% response) and 15 residents (100% response) were surveyed. Audiotaped and written logs were similar, demonstrating good recall. Students recorded an average of 11 teaching encounters (range 3 to 20) per 30 hour period, lasting a total of 73 minutes (range 17 to 178) and each 6.7 +/- 14 minutes long. Both logs and surveys identified most teaching as unsolicited, done mostly by junior and chief residents, focused chiefly on diagnosis and using a Socratic style. Most teaching occurred in the operating room, yet its occurrence was unpredictable; in surveys the emergency room and clinic settings were perceived as more important. Staff surgeons contributed 27% of the logged encounters yet were perceived in surveys as the least contributors. Residents' and clerks' perceptions of teaching were similar except for residents overvaluing the amount of senior teaching (P = 0.04). The resident level correlated significantly with the comfort of teaching (r = 0.618, P = 0.04). Senior residents encouraged more problem-solving, whereas juniors favored minilectures. Only one resident had received formal teaching instruction. CONCLUSIONS: Informal teaching of surgery clerks is variable and occurs through multiple short encounters in many settings and by various trainees. Efforts to improve the teaching process should focus on providing formal teaching instruction early in residency, specifically geared toward short encounters in flexible settings. Both the operating room as a learning environment and staff surgeons as informal teachers must be intentionally integrated into the teaching process.
BACKGROUND: While on surgical rotations, clinical clerks spend more time on the ward and in the emergency department than in any other location. Consequently, their in-house experience is of great importance to their education-yet the teaching processes in these settings have never been fully explored. Unlike the structured pre-clerkship years, the exact breakdown of a clerk's hospital-based education is difficult to elucidate. To effectively evaluate a clerkship curriculum, it is essential to know what clerks are being taught outside of seminars, how that teaching occurs, and by whom. This study proposes a methodology by which a surgical clerkship curriculum can be evaluated. METHODS: For the purpose of the study, surgery clerks carried written and audio logs of their informal teaching encounters during one on-call period (30 hours). These included who taught them, where, by what methods, for how long, and what prompted the teaching. A survey of similar variables was administered to all clerks who rotated through general surgery over 4 months and to all general surgery residents. RESULTS: Four clerks returned completed logs (100% response rate), and 17 clerks (85% response) and 15 residents (100% response) were surveyed. Audiotaped and written logs were similar, demonstrating good recall. Students recorded an average of 11 teaching encounters (range 3 to 20) per 30 hour period, lasting a total of 73 minutes (range 17 to 178) and each 6.7 +/- 14 minutes long. Both logs and surveys identified most teaching as unsolicited, done mostly by junior and chief residents, focused chiefly on diagnosis and using a Socratic style. Most teaching occurred in the operating room, yet its occurrence was unpredictable; in surveys the emergency room and clinic settings were perceived as more important. Staff surgeons contributed 27% of the logged encounters yet were perceived in surveys as the least contributors. Residents' and clerks' perceptions of teaching were similar except for residents overvaluing the amount of senior teaching (P = 0.04). The resident level correlated significantly with the comfort of teaching (r = 0.618, P = 0.04). Senior residents encouraged more problem-solving, whereas juniors favored minilectures. Only one resident had received formal teaching instruction. CONCLUSIONS: Informal teaching of surgery clerks is variable and occurs through multiple short encounters in many settings and by various trainees. Efforts to improve the teaching process should focus on providing formal teaching instruction early in residency, specifically geared toward short encounters in flexible settings. Both the operating room as a learning environment and staff surgeons as informal teachers must be intentionally integrated into the teaching process.