What is the future of training in surgery? Needs assessment of national stakeholders

Sara Kim, Brian J. Dunkin, John T. Paige, Jane M. Eggerstedt, Cate Nicholas, Melina C. Vassilliou, Donn H. Spight, Jose F. Pliego, Robert M. Rush, James N. Lau, Robert O. Carpenter, Daniel J. Scott

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background The Curriculum Committee of the American College of Surgeons-Accredited Educational Institutes conducted a need assessment to (1) identify gaps between ideal and actual practices in areas of surgical care, (2) explore educational solutions for addressing these gaps, and (3) shape a vision to advance the future of training in surgery. Methods National stakeholders were recruited from the committee members' professional network and interviewed via telephone. Interview questions targeted areas for improving surgical patient care, optimal educational solutions for training in surgery including simulation roles, and entities that should primarily bear training costs. We performed an iterative, qualitative analysis including member checking to identify key themes. Results Twenty-two interviewees included state/national board representatives, risk managers, multispecialty faculty/program directors, nurses, trainees, an industry representative, and a patient. Surgeons' communication with patients, families, and team members was raised consistently by stakeholders as a way to establish clear expectations regarding pre-, peri-, and postoperative care. Other comments highlighted the surgeon's development and demonstration and maintenance of cognitive and technical skills, including surgical judgment. Stakeholders also reiterated the critical need for surgeons to engage in on-going self-assessment and professional development to identify and remediate recognized limitations. Recommended learning modalities for meeting surgeons' needs included active learning (deliberate practice, diverse patient experiences), experiential learning (simulation), and peer and mentored learning (preceptorship). Conclusion This first formal needs assessment of education for surgeons points to opportunities for educational programs in patient-centered communication, learning models that match preferences of new generations of trainees, and training in interprofessional/interdisciplinary team communication and teamwork.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)707-717
Number of pages11
JournalSurgery (United States)
Volume156
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Needs Assessment
Problem-Based Learning
Learning
Interdisciplinary Communication
Preceptorship
Communication
Committee Membership
Perioperative Care
Patient Advocacy
Postoperative Care
Telephone
Curriculum
Patient Care
Industry
Nurses
Maintenance
Surgeons
Interviews
Education
Costs and Cost Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Kim, S., Dunkin, B. J., Paige, J. T., Eggerstedt, J. M., Nicholas, C., Vassilliou, M. C., ... Scott, D. J. (2014). What is the future of training in surgery? Needs assessment of national stakeholders. Surgery (United States), 156(3), 707-717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2014.04.047

What is the future of training in surgery? Needs assessment of national stakeholders. / Kim, Sara; Dunkin, Brian J.; Paige, John T.; Eggerstedt, Jane M.; Nicholas, Cate; Vassilliou, Melina C.; Spight, Donn H.; Pliego, Jose F.; Rush, Robert M.; Lau, James N.; Carpenter, Robert O.; Scott, Daniel J.

In: Surgery (United States), Vol. 156, No. 3, 2014, p. 707-717.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kim, S, Dunkin, BJ, Paige, JT, Eggerstedt, JM, Nicholas, C, Vassilliou, MC, Spight, DH, Pliego, JF, Rush, RM, Lau, JN, Carpenter, RO & Scott, DJ 2014, 'What is the future of training in surgery? Needs assessment of national stakeholders', Surgery (United States), vol. 156, no. 3, pp. 707-717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2014.04.047
Kim S, Dunkin BJ, Paige JT, Eggerstedt JM, Nicholas C, Vassilliou MC et al. What is the future of training in surgery? Needs assessment of national stakeholders. Surgery (United States). 2014;156(3):707-717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2014.04.047
Kim, Sara ; Dunkin, Brian J. ; Paige, John T. ; Eggerstedt, Jane M. ; Nicholas, Cate ; Vassilliou, Melina C. ; Spight, Donn H. ; Pliego, Jose F. ; Rush, Robert M. ; Lau, James N. ; Carpenter, Robert O. ; Scott, Daniel J. / What is the future of training in surgery? Needs assessment of national stakeholders. In: Surgery (United States). 2014 ; Vol. 156, No. 3. pp. 707-717.
@article{40b63d9b2f9d4bfb83af45a2220dc7db,
title = "What is the future of training in surgery? Needs assessment of national stakeholders",
abstract = "Background The Curriculum Committee of the American College of Surgeons-Accredited Educational Institutes conducted a need assessment to (1) identify gaps between ideal and actual practices in areas of surgical care, (2) explore educational solutions for addressing these gaps, and (3) shape a vision to advance the future of training in surgery. Methods National stakeholders were recruited from the committee members' professional network and interviewed via telephone. Interview questions targeted areas for improving surgical patient care, optimal educational solutions for training in surgery including simulation roles, and entities that should primarily bear training costs. We performed an iterative, qualitative analysis including member checking to identify key themes. Results Twenty-two interviewees included state/national board representatives, risk managers, multispecialty faculty/program directors, nurses, trainees, an industry representative, and a patient. Surgeons' communication with patients, families, and team members was raised consistently by stakeholders as a way to establish clear expectations regarding pre-, peri-, and postoperative care. Other comments highlighted the surgeon's development and demonstration and maintenance of cognitive and technical skills, including surgical judgment. Stakeholders also reiterated the critical need for surgeons to engage in on-going self-assessment and professional development to identify and remediate recognized limitations. Recommended learning modalities for meeting surgeons' needs included active learning (deliberate practice, diverse patient experiences), experiential learning (simulation), and peer and mentored learning (preceptorship). Conclusion This first formal needs assessment of education for surgeons points to opportunities for educational programs in patient-centered communication, learning models that match preferences of new generations of trainees, and training in interprofessional/interdisciplinary team communication and teamwork.",
author = "Sara Kim and Dunkin, {Brian J.} and Paige, {John T.} and Eggerstedt, {Jane M.} and Cate Nicholas and Vassilliou, {Melina C.} and Spight, {Donn H.} and Pliego, {Jose F.} and Rush, {Robert M.} and Lau, {James N.} and Carpenter, {Robert O.} and Scott, {Daniel J.}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1016/j.surg.2014.04.047",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "156",
pages = "707--717",
journal = "Surgery (United States)",
issn = "0039-6060",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What is the future of training in surgery? Needs assessment of national stakeholders

AU - Kim, Sara

AU - Dunkin, Brian J.

AU - Paige, John T.

AU - Eggerstedt, Jane M.

AU - Nicholas, Cate

AU - Vassilliou, Melina C.

AU - Spight, Donn H.

AU - Pliego, Jose F.

AU - Rush, Robert M.

AU - Lau, James N.

AU - Carpenter, Robert O.

AU - Scott, Daniel J.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Background The Curriculum Committee of the American College of Surgeons-Accredited Educational Institutes conducted a need assessment to (1) identify gaps between ideal and actual practices in areas of surgical care, (2) explore educational solutions for addressing these gaps, and (3) shape a vision to advance the future of training in surgery. Methods National stakeholders were recruited from the committee members' professional network and interviewed via telephone. Interview questions targeted areas for improving surgical patient care, optimal educational solutions for training in surgery including simulation roles, and entities that should primarily bear training costs. We performed an iterative, qualitative analysis including member checking to identify key themes. Results Twenty-two interviewees included state/national board representatives, risk managers, multispecialty faculty/program directors, nurses, trainees, an industry representative, and a patient. Surgeons' communication with patients, families, and team members was raised consistently by stakeholders as a way to establish clear expectations regarding pre-, peri-, and postoperative care. Other comments highlighted the surgeon's development and demonstration and maintenance of cognitive and technical skills, including surgical judgment. Stakeholders also reiterated the critical need for surgeons to engage in on-going self-assessment and professional development to identify and remediate recognized limitations. Recommended learning modalities for meeting surgeons' needs included active learning (deliberate practice, diverse patient experiences), experiential learning (simulation), and peer and mentored learning (preceptorship). Conclusion This first formal needs assessment of education for surgeons points to opportunities for educational programs in patient-centered communication, learning models that match preferences of new generations of trainees, and training in interprofessional/interdisciplinary team communication and teamwork.

AB - Background The Curriculum Committee of the American College of Surgeons-Accredited Educational Institutes conducted a need assessment to (1) identify gaps between ideal and actual practices in areas of surgical care, (2) explore educational solutions for addressing these gaps, and (3) shape a vision to advance the future of training in surgery. Methods National stakeholders were recruited from the committee members' professional network and interviewed via telephone. Interview questions targeted areas for improving surgical patient care, optimal educational solutions for training in surgery including simulation roles, and entities that should primarily bear training costs. We performed an iterative, qualitative analysis including member checking to identify key themes. Results Twenty-two interviewees included state/national board representatives, risk managers, multispecialty faculty/program directors, nurses, trainees, an industry representative, and a patient. Surgeons' communication with patients, families, and team members was raised consistently by stakeholders as a way to establish clear expectations regarding pre-, peri-, and postoperative care. Other comments highlighted the surgeon's development and demonstration and maintenance of cognitive and technical skills, including surgical judgment. Stakeholders also reiterated the critical need for surgeons to engage in on-going self-assessment and professional development to identify and remediate recognized limitations. Recommended learning modalities for meeting surgeons' needs included active learning (deliberate practice, diverse patient experiences), experiential learning (simulation), and peer and mentored learning (preceptorship). Conclusion This first formal needs assessment of education for surgeons points to opportunities for educational programs in patient-centered communication, learning models that match preferences of new generations of trainees, and training in interprofessional/interdisciplinary team communication and teamwork.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84907324785&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84907324785&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.surg.2014.04.047

DO - 10.1016/j.surg.2014.04.047

M3 - Article

C2 - 25175505

AN - SCOPUS:84907324785

VL - 156

SP - 707

EP - 717

JO - Surgery (United States)

JF - Surgery (United States)

SN - 0039-6060

IS - 3

ER -