AIMS: The ability of surgeons to site a colostomy is assessed in a clinical model. In addition, the tuition received by surgical trainees in stoma siting is also reviewed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eleven surgeons (trainees--six, colorectal subspeciality interest--two) were asked to site an end colostomy on nine patients using an adhesive disc (diameter--1cm). The position of the stoma was then measured on the 'x' and 'y' axis of a 2cm box grid, (maximum error--1cm) which was placed on the abdomen and centred on the umbilicus. The positions were then compared with that chosen by the stoma nurse who was taken as the gold standard. Results were compared using ANOVA and the Mann Whitney--U test. A telephone questionnaire was then undertaken to review the training of junior surgeons. RESULTS: There was variance present within the group of surgeons studied (p<0.01). Trainees and consultants had a similar accuracy in stoma-siting (p<0.2). Consultants with a colorectal subspeciality interest were better at placing stomas than those with a general interest (p<0.002). Badly placed stomas were three times more likely to be too low than too high (p<0.002). Thirty of 37 trainees reported receiving no undergraduate training from a specialist stoma nurse. Ninety per cent received postgraduate training from another surgeon while a specialist nurse trained only 35%. CONCLUSION: There was no difference between trainees and consultants in their ability to site a colostomy. However, surgeons with a subspeciality interest chose stoma sites that were more consistent with the specialist nurse than general surgeons. Training is haphazard and ability is frequently assumed rather than proven.
AIMS: The ability of surgeons to site a colostomy is assessed in a clinical model. In addition, the tuition received by surgical trainees in stoma siting is also reviewed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eleven surgeons (trainees--six, colorectal subspeciality interest--two) were asked to site an end colostomy on nine patients using an adhesive disc (diameter--1cm). The position of the stoma was then measured on the 'x' and 'y' axis of a 2cm box grid, (maximum error--1cm) which was placed on the abdomen and centred on the umbilicus. The positions were then compared with that chosen by the stoma nurse who was taken as the gold standard. Results were compared using ANOVA and the Mann Whitney--U test. A telephone questionnaire was then undertaken to review the training of junior surgeons. RESULTS: There was variance present within the group of surgeons studied (p<0.01). Trainees and consultants had a similar accuracy in stoma-siting (p<0.2). Consultants with a colorectal subspeciality interest were better at placing stomas than those with a general interest (p<0.002). Badly placed stomas were three times more likely to be too low than too high (p<0.002). Thirty of 37 trainees reported receiving no undergraduate training from a specialist stoma nurse. Ninety per cent received postgraduate training from another surgeon while a specialist nurse trained only 35%. CONCLUSION: There was no difference between trainees and consultants in their ability to site a colostomy. However, surgeons with a subspeciality interest chose stoma sites that were more consistent with the specialist nurse than general surgeons. Training is haphazard and ability is frequently assumed rather than proven.