Hangama C Fayaz1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Raymond M Smith1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Mohammad H Ebrahimzadeh1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Hans-Christoph Pape1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Javad Parvizi1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Khaled J Saleh1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Jens-Peter Stahl1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Johannes Zeichen1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, James F Kellam1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Javad Mortazavi1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Ashok Rajgopal1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Vivek Dahiya1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Wolfgang Zinser1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Leonid Reznik1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Igor Shubnyakov1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Marko Pećina1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15, Jesse B Jupiter1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,1,15. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. 3. Universitaets Spital Zuerich, Switzerland. 4. Rothman Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Sheridan Building, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 5. Michigan Musculoskeletal Institute, Madison Heights, USA. 6. Department of Trauma, Klinikum Dortmund, Germany. 7. Department of Trauma, Johannes Wesling Klinikum Minden, Germany. 8. Department of Orthopedics, University of Texas, USA. 9. University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. 10. Fortis Bone and Joint Institute, India. 11. Department of Orthopedics, St Vinzenz Hospital Dinslaken, Germany. 12. Omsk State Medical University, Russia. 13. R.R. Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedics. Saint Petersburg, Russia. 14. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine University of Zagreb,Croatia. 15. Research performed at Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To date, little has been published comparing the structure and requirements of orthopedic training programs across multiple countries. The goal of this study was to summarize and compare the characteristics of orthopedic training programs in the U.S.A., U.K., Canada, Australia, Germany, India, China, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran. METHODS: We communicated with responders using a predetermined questionnaire regarding the national orthopedic training program requirements in each respondent's home country. Specific items of interest included the following: the structure of the residency program, the time required to become an orthopedic surgeon, whether there is a log book, whether there is a final examination prior to becoming an orthopedic surgeon, the type and extent of faculty supervision, and the nature of national in-training written exams and assessment methods. Questionnaire data were augmented by reviewing each country's publicly accessible residency training documents that are available on the web and visiting the official website of the main orthopedic association of each country. RESULTS: The syllabi consist of three elements: clinical knowledge, clinical skills, and professional skills. The skill of today's trainees predicts the quality of future orthopedic surgeons. The European Board of Orthopedics and Traumatology (EBOT) exam throughout the European Union countries should function as the European board examination in orthopedics. We must standardize many educational procedures worldwide in the same way we standardized patient safety. CONCLUSION: Considering the world's cultural and political diversity, the world is nearly unified in regards to orthopedics. The procedures (structure of the residency programs, duration of the residency programs, selection procedures, using a log book, continuous assessment and final examination) must be standardized worldwide, as implemented for patient safety. To achieve this goal, we must access and evaluate more information on the residency programs in different countries and their needs by questioning them regarding what they need and what we can do for them to make a difference.
BACKGROUND: To date, little has been published comparing the structure and requirements of orthopedic training programs across multiple countries. The goal of this study was to summarize and compare the characteristics of orthopedic training programs in the U.S.A., U.K., Canada, Australia, Germany, India, China, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran. METHODS: We communicated with responders using a predetermined questionnaire regarding the national orthopedic training program requirements in each respondent's home country. Specific items of interest included the following: the structure of the residency program, the time required to become an orthopedic surgeon, whether there is a log book, whether there is a final examination prior to becoming an orthopedic surgeon, the type and extent of faculty supervision, and the nature of national in-training written exams and assessment methods. Questionnaire data were augmented by reviewing each country's publicly accessible residency training documents that are available on the web and visiting the official website of the main orthopedic association of each country. RESULTS: The syllabi consist of three elements: clinical knowledge, clinical skills, and professional skills. The skill of today's trainees predicts the quality of future orthopedic surgeons. The European Board of Orthopedics and Traumatology (EBOT) exam throughout the European Union countries should function as the European board examination in orthopedics. We must standardize many educational procedures worldwide in the same way we standardized patient safety. CONCLUSION: Considering the world's cultural and political diversity, the world is nearly unified in regards to orthopedics. The procedures (structure of the residency programs, duration of the residency programs, selection procedures, using a log book, continuous assessment and final examination) must be standardized worldwide, as implemented for patient safety. To achieve this goal, we must access and evaluate more information on the residency programs in different countries and their needs by questioning them regarding what they need and what we can do for them to make a difference.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cultural competences; Educational procedures; Politics; Residency programs; Women in Orthopedics
Authors: George A Brown; Keikhosrow Firoozbakhsh; Thomas A DeCoster; José R Reyna; Moheb Moneim Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2003 Impact factor: 5.284