D S Tichansky1, R J Taddeucci, J Harper, A K Madan. 1. Section of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Tennessee Health Science, 956 Court Avenue, Ste. G218, Memphis, TN 38163, USA. dtichans@utmem.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With the increase in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) fellowships, the concept of the ideal and standardized training curriculum is emerging in importance. The authors hypothesize that the procedure mix in current MIS training is different from what current MIS fellows would expect for their "ideal" fellowship. METHODS: An anonymous survey of current MIS fellows examined their perceptions of the case diversity and volume they expect to perform in their fellowships as compared with an ideal fellowship. Differences between expected and ideal case volume were analyzed using Wilcoxon tests. RESULTS: A total of 32 questionnaires were returned. Current MIS fellows believe their expected training will exceed the ideal volume of laparoscopic cholecystectomies (p = 0.002). They believe their expected training is equivalent to ideal training in laparoscopic gastric bypass, ventral herniorraphy, inguinal herniorraphy, antireflux procedures, appendectomy, and diagnostic endoscopy (nonsignificant difference). However, current expected training falls short of their "ideal" case volume in laparoscopic gastric banding, colectomy, common bile duct exploration, gastrectomy, esophagectomy, splenectomy, adrenalectomy, hepatectomy, nephrectomy, and pancreatectomy (p < 0.05). The current MIS fellows also expect that their thoracoscopic, therapeutic endoscopy, and robotic procedure volume will be less than "ideal" (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In 13 of 20 procedure types, current MIS fellows expect to perform a smaller case volume than in an "ideal" fellowship. The ideal case volume in the MIS fellowship curriculum needs to be defined better.
BACKGROUND: With the increase in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) fellowships, the concept of the ideal and standardized training curriculum is emerging in importance. The authors hypothesize that the procedure mix in current MIS training is different from what current MIS fellows would expect for their "ideal" fellowship. METHODS: An anonymous survey of current MIS fellows examined their perceptions of the case diversity and volume they expect to perform in their fellowships as compared with an ideal fellowship. Differences between expected and ideal case volume were analyzed using Wilcoxon tests. RESULTS: A total of 32 questionnaires were returned. Current MIS fellows believe their expected training will exceed the ideal volume of laparoscopic cholecystectomies (p = 0.002). They believe their expected training is equivalent to ideal training in laparoscopic gastric bypass, ventral herniorraphy, inguinal herniorraphy, antireflux procedures, appendectomy, and diagnostic endoscopy (nonsignificant difference). However, current expected training falls short of their "ideal" case volume in laparoscopic gastric banding, colectomy, common bile duct exploration, gastrectomy, esophagectomy, splenectomy, adrenalectomy, hepatectomy, nephrectomy, and pancreatectomy (p < 0.05). The current MIS fellows also expect that their thoracoscopic, therapeutic endoscopy, and robotic procedure volume will be less than "ideal" (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In 13 of 20 procedure types, current MIS fellows expect to perform a smaller case volume than in an "ideal" fellowship. The ideal case volume in the MIS fellowship curriculum needs to be defined better.
Authors: Lee L Swanstrom; Adrian Park; Marty Arregui; Morris Franklin; C Daniel Smith; Christina Blaney Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Susannah M Wyles; Danilo Miskovic; Zhifang Ni; Austin G Acheson; Charles Maxwell-Armstrong; Robert Longman; Tom Cecil; Mark G Coleman; Alan F Horgan; George B Hanna Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-11-07 Impact factor: 4.584