Antoine N Saliba1, Ali T Taher1, Hani Tamim1, Afif R Harb1, Aurelie Mailhac2, Amr Radwan1, Faek R Jamali3. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon. 3. Department of Surgery, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon. Electronic address: fj03@aub.edu.lb.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Surgical residency training aims to prepare the surgical resident to become an independent practitioner of surgery. Because surgical residency training remains the sole educational channel to prepare surgeons for independent practice, our study aimed to explore the effect of resident involvement in surgery across a broad spectrum of surgical specialties to answer questions patients, surgeons, and surgical residency program directors may have concerning the effect of having residents participate in performing surgical operations. STUDY DESIGN: This analysis used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database to establish whether patients having operations involving residents were at a risk of postoperative mortality or morbidity similar to patients having operations performed by attending surgeons alone, across a wide array of surgical procedures. RESULTS: For operations in which residents were involved, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for mortality was 0.93 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.97), as compared with the group of patients on whom attending surgeons operated alone without any level of resident involvement. For operations in which residents were involved, the adjusted OR for morbidity was 1.02 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.04), as compared with the group of patients on whom attending surgeons operated alone without any level of resident involvement. There was a slightly statistically significantly higher risk of cardiac and respiratory morbidities in the group with any level of resident involvement as compared with the "attending alone" group. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms that, across different surgical subspecialties, resident involvement in surgery is associated with comparable morbidity and lower mortality outcomes. This provides a reassuring answer to patients, attending surgeons, and surgical program directors.
BACKGROUND: Surgical residency training aims to prepare the surgical resident to become an independent practitioner of surgery. Because surgical residency training remains the sole educational channel to prepare surgeons for independent practice, our study aimed to explore the effect of resident involvement in surgery across a broad spectrum of surgical specialties to answer questions patients, surgeons, and surgical residency program directors may have concerning the effect of having residents participate in performing surgical operations. STUDY DESIGN: This analysis used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database to establish whether patients having operations involving residents were at a risk of postoperative mortality or morbidity similar to patients having operations performed by attending surgeons alone, across a wide array of surgical procedures. RESULTS: For operations in which residents were involved, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for mortality was 0.93 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.97), as compared with the group of patients on whom attending surgeons operated alone without any level of resident involvement. For operations in which residents were involved, the adjusted OR for morbidity was 1.02 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.04), as compared with the group of patients on whom attending surgeons operated alone without any level of resident involvement. There was a slightly statistically significantly higher risk of cardiac and respiratory morbidities in the group with any level of resident involvement as compared with the "attending alone" group. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms that, across different surgical subspecialties, resident involvement in surgery is associated with comparable morbidity and lower mortality outcomes. This provides a reassuring answer to patients, attending surgeons, and surgical program directors.
Authors: Rosalie A Carr; Catherine W Chung; Christian M Schmidt; Andrea Jester; Molly E Kilbane; Michael G House; Nicholas J Zyromski; Attila Nakeeb; C Max Schmidt; Eugene P Ceppa Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-02-13 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Blayne Welk; Jennifer Winick-Ng; Andrew McClure; Chris Vinden; Sumit Dave; Stephen Pautler Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2016 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Emily A Slopnick; Adonis K Hijaz; J Welles Henderson; Sangeeta T Mahajan; Carvell T Nguyen; Simon P Kim Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2018-02-20 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Donald K Groves; Maria S Altieri; Brianne Sullivan; Jie Yang; Mark A Talamini; Aurora D Pryor Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2018-07-06 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Audrey E Ertel; Zachary D McHenry; Vijay K Venkatesan; Dennis J Hanseman; Koffi Wima; Richard S Hoehn; Shimul A Shah; Daniel E Abbott Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2016-11-04 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Kevin R Kasten; Adam C Celio; Lauren Trakimas; Mark L Manwaring; Konstantinos Spaniolas Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-07-19 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Tarik K Yuce; Amy Holmstrom; Nathaniel J Soper; Alexander P Nagle; Eric S Hungness; Ryan P Merkow; Ezra N Teitelbaum Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2020-09-15 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Vivienne Keding; Kai Zacharowski; Wolf O Bechstein; Patrick Meybohm; Andreas A Schnitzbauer Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2018-08-07 Impact factor: 2.754