Anne-Lise D D'Angelo1, Elaine R Cohen1, Calvin Kwan1, Shlomi Laufer2, Caprice Greenberg1, Jacob Greenberg1, Douglas Wiegmann3, Carla M Pugh4. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 600 Highland Avenue H4/385A CSC, Madison, WI 53792-3236, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 600 Highland Avenue H4/385A CSC, Madison, WI 53792-3236, USA; Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA. 3. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 600 Highland Avenue H4/385A CSC, Madison, WI 53792-3236, USA; Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA. Electronic address: pugh@surgery.wisc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent literature has called into question resident readiness for operative independence at the end of general surgery training. METHODS: We used a simulation-based exit examination to assess resident readiness. Six chief residents performed 3 simulated procedures: bowel anastomosis, laparoscopic ventral hernia (LVH) repair, and pancreaticojejunostomy. Faculty assessed resident performance using task-specific checklists, Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS), and final product analysis. RESULTS: Residents' individual task-specific checklist scores ranged from 25% to 100% across all 3 procedures. Mean OSATS scores ranged from 4.06 to 4.23/5.0. Residents scored significantly higher on "instrument knowledge" (mean = 4.78, standard deviation [SD] = 23) than "time and motion" (mean = 3.94, SD = .48, P = .025) and "ability to adapt to individual pathologic circumstances" (mean = 4.06, SD =.12, P = .002). Final product analysis revealed a range of errors, including incorrect technique and poor intraoperative planning. CONCLUSIONS: Despite relatively high OSATS ratings, residents had a wide range of errors and procedure outcomes. Exit assessments using multiple evaluation metrics may improve awareness of residents' learning needs.
BACKGROUND: Recent literature has called into question resident readiness for operative independence at the end of general surgery training. METHODS: We used a simulation-based exit examination to assess resident readiness. Six chief residents performed 3 simulated procedures: bowel anastomosis, laparoscopic ventral hernia (LVH) repair, and pancreaticojejunostomy. Faculty assessed resident performance using task-specific checklists, Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS), and final product analysis. RESULTS: Residents' individual task-specific checklist scores ranged from 25% to 100% across all 3 procedures. Mean OSATS scores ranged from 4.06 to 4.23/5.0. Residents scored significantly higher on "instrument knowledge" (mean = 4.78, standard deviation [SD] = 23) than "time and motion" (mean = 3.94, SD = .48, P = .025) and "ability to adapt to individual pathologic circumstances" (mean = 4.06, SD =.12, P = .002). Final product analysis revealed a range of errors, including incorrect technique and poor intraoperative planning. CONCLUSIONS: Despite relatively high OSATS ratings, residents had a wide range of errors and procedure outcomes. Exit assessments using multiple evaluation metrics may improve awareness of residents' learning needs.
Authors: Richard H Bell; Thomas W Biester; Arnold Tabuenca; Robert S Rhodes; Joseph B Cofer; L D Britt; Frank R Lewis Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: David A Davis; Paul E Mazmanian; Michael Fordis; R Van Harrison; Kevin E Thorpe; Laure Perrier Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-09-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Aimee K Gardner; Ross E Willis; Brian J Dunkin; Kent R Van Sickle; Kimberly M Brown; Michael S Truitt; John M Uecker; Lonnie Gentry; Daniel J Scott Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-10-20 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Neal Benedict; Pamela Smithburger; Amy Calabrese Donihi; Philip Empey; Lawrence Kobulinsky; Amy Seybert; Thomas Waters; Scott Drab; John Lutz; Deborah Farkas; Susan Meyer Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2017-02-25 Impact factor: 2.047
Authors: Tim Dwyer; Veronica Wadey; Douglas Archibald; William Kraemer; Jesse Slade Shantz; John Townley; Darrell Ogilvie-Harris; Massimo Petrera; Peter Ferguson; Markku Nousiainen Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Anne-Lise D D'Angelo; Rebecca D Ray; Caitlin G Jenewein; Grace F Jones; Carla M Pugh Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2015-06-23 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Jay N Nathwani; Rebekah M Fiers; Rebecca D Ray; Anna K Witt; Katherine E Law; ShannonM DiMarco; Carla M Pugh Journal: J Surg Educ Date: 2016-09-23 Impact factor: 2.891