Teaching and assessing technical proficiency in surgical subspecialty fellowships

Journal of Surgical Education

Volumn 69, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 521-528

  Gearhart, Susan L ^a   Wang, Ming Hsien ^a   Gilson, Marta M ^a   Chen, Belinda ^a   Kern, David E ^a  

^a DEPARTMENT OF PATHOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

fellowship; surgical subspecialty; technical proficiency

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; COLORECTAL SURGERY; EDUCATION PROGRAM; FACULTY STUDENT RELATION; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; FEMALE; GROUPS BY AGE; HUMAN; INTERNET; MALE; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PEDIATRIC SURGERY; PEER GROUP; PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; SIMULATION; SKILL; SURGICAL TRAINING; UROLOGIC SURGERY; VIDEORECORDING;

ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTERS; ACCREDITATION; ADULT; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COLORECTAL SURGERY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, GRADUATE; FELLOWSHIPS AND SCHOLARSHIPS; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNSHIP AND RESIDENCY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PEDIATRICS; PHYSICIAN EXECUTIVES; PROGRAM EVALUATION; QUESTIONNAIRES; SELF-ASSESSMENT; SPECIALTIES, SURGICAL; TEACHING; UNITED STATES; UROLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES;

EID: 84861971693     PISSN: 19317204     EISSN: 18787452     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2012.04.004     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Available at: http://www.acgme.org/acWebsite/RRC-280/280-coreComp.asp. Accessed February 29, 2012.
2. Available at: http://www.acgme.org/acWebsite/downloads/RRC-progReq/440- general-surgery-01012008-u08102008.pdf. Accessed February 29, 2012.
3. Walter AJ. Surgical education for the 21st century: beyond the apprentice model. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2006;33:233-236.
4. Darzi A, Smith S, Taffinder N. Assessing operative skill needs to become more objective. BMJ. 1999;318:887-888.
5. Memon MA, Brigden D, Subramanya MS, Memon B. Assessing the surgeon's technical skills: analysis of available tools. Acad Med. 2010;85:869-880.
6. Bell RH. Surgical Council on Resident Education: a new organization devoted to graduate surgical education. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:341-346.
7. Park J, MacRae H, Musselman LJ, et al. Randomized controlled trial of virtual reality simulator training: transfer to live patients. Am J Surg. 2007;194:205-211.
8. Haycock A, Koch A, Familiaria P, et al. Training and transfer of colonoscopy skills: a multinational, randomized, blinded, controlled trial of simulator versus bedside training. Gastrointestinal Endosc. 2010;71:298-301.
9. Scott DJ, Pugh CM, Ritter EM, et al. No new directions in simulation-based surgical education and training: validation and transfer of surgical skills, use of non-surgeons as faculty, use of simulation to screen and select surgery residents, and long-term follow-up of learners. Surgery. 2011;149:735-744.
10. Sachdeva AK, Buyske J, Dunnington GL, et al. A new paradigm for surgical procedural training. Curr Probl Surg. 2011;48:854-968.
11. Jaffer A, Bednarz B, Challacombe B, Sriprasad S. The assessment of surgical competency in the UK. Int J Surg. 2009;7:12-15.
12. Korndorffer JR Jr, Scott DJ, Sierra R, et al. Developing and testing competency levels for laparoscopic skills training. Arch Surg. 2005;140:80-4.
13. Gallagher AG, Neary P, Gillen P, et al. Novel method for assessment and selection of trainees for higher surgical training in General Surgery. ANZ J Surg. 2008;78:282-290.
14. Carrol S, Kennedy A, Traynor O, Gallagher A. Objective assessment of surgical performance and its impact on a national selection program of candidates for higher surgical training. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2009;62:1543-1549.
15. Salgado J, Grantcharov TP, Papasavas PK, Gagne DJ, Caushaj PF. Technical skills assessment as part of the selection process for a fellowship in minimally invasive surgery. Surg Endosc. 2009;23:641-644.
16. Knowles M. The Adult Learner: A Neglected Specimen, 4th ed. Houston: Gulf Publishing; 1990.
17. Pugh C, Plachta S, Auyang E, Pryor A, Hungness E. Outcome measures for surgical simulators: is the focus on technical skills the best approach? Surgery. 2010;147:646-654.
18. Pernar LI, Breen E, Ashley SW, Peyre SE. Preoperative learning goals set by surgical residents and faculty. J Surg Res. 2011;170:1-5.
19. Ko C, Escarce J, Baker L, Sharp J, Guarino C. Predictors of surgery resident satisfaction with teaching by attendings. Am Surg. 2005;241:373-380.
20. Sanfey H, Ketchum J, Bartlett J, et al. Verification of proficiency in basic skills for postgraduate year 1 residents. Surgery. 2010;148:759-767.
21. Sugden C, Aggarwal R. Assessment and feedback in the skills laboratory and operating room. Surg Clin North Am. 2010;90:14-19.
22. Lallas CD, Davis And Members Of The Society Of Urologic Robotic Surgeons JW. Robotic surgery training with commercially available simulation system in 2011: a current review and practice pattern from the society of Urologic robotic surgeons. J Endourol. 2012;26:283-293.
23. Sroka G, Feldman LS, Vassilliou MC, et al. Fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery simulator training to proficiency improves laparoscopic performance in the operating room-a randomized controlled trial. Am J Surg. 2010;199: 115-120.
24. Brydges R, Farhat WA, El-Hout Y, Dubrowski A. Pediatric urology training: performance-based assessment using the fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery. J Surg Res. 2010;161:240-245.
25. Hur CH, Arden D, Dodge LE, Zheng B, Ricciotti HA. Fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery: a surgical skills assessment tool in gynecology. JSLS. 2011;15:21-26.
26. Boyle E, O'Keeffe DA, Naughton PA, et al. The importance of expert feedback during endovascular simulator training. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54:240-248.