Explore the vast range of titles available.

Surgery for spinal disorders represents some of the commonest surgical procedures performed in many countries worldwide, carried out by neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons. Residency training is shifting to competency-based medical education, which requires setting standards for graduating residents and their assessments. However, gaps exist in the literature regarding the parameters used for assessment and the mastery levels expected of graduating residents in the performance of common spinal procedures as defined in Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs). The objectives of the study were to describe the assessment parameters used for residents, identify the standard of performance expected of graduating residents of EPAs of spinal procedures, and identify factors predicting the expected standard of competent performance of graduating residents. The survey was sent to neurosurgery and orthopedic surgery Faculty requesting their recommendations on parameters of assessment and the expected standard competence performance for EPAs related to spinal procedures using our entrustment scale (A-E). Based on total responses, the recommended number of assessments and assessors for each EPA was 5 and 2, respectively. Regarding each specialty, there was no significant difference in the recommended number of assessments for each EPA. However, neurosurgery Faculty recommended higher number of assessors(n = 3) than orthopedic surgery Faculty(n = 2) for both posterior spinal decompression EPA(PSD) (p = 0.01) and spinal instrumentation EPA(SI) (p = 0.04). Based on total responses, 83% felt PSD was appropriate to the general practice, 86.8% considered it not too broad, and 62.3% expected entrustment level E as a graduation target. The proportions of these ratings were slightly lower for SI at 58.5%, 71.7% and 56.6%, respectively. Both specialties indicated that the EPAs were not too broad. In contrast, neurosurgery Faculty were more likely to consider these EPAs appropriate for general practice than orthopedic surgery Faculty for both PSD (94.7% vs 53.3%, p = 0.0003) and SI (68.4% vs 33.3%, p = 0.02). Moreover, neurosurgery Faculty had a higher expected standard of performance as a graduation target for both PSD (Level E 76.3% vs 26.7%, p = 0.001) and SI (Level E 65.8% vs 33.3%, p = 0.03) than orthopedic surgery Faculty. Expectations of entrustment level E for PSD was associated with the belief that the current EPA was appropriate for the general practice of their specialty with an odds ratio of 8.35 (p = 0.01, 95%CI 1.53-45.67). A difference exists in parameters of assessment and expected standard competence performance of spine procedures among spinal surgery specialties. In our opinion, there should be efforts to develop consensus between specialties for the sake of uniform delivery of high-quality care for patients regardless of the specialty of their surgeon. Our results will be particularly valuable to certification bodies in the assessment of spinal milestones. This study has important implications for the design of residency and fellowship education in spinal surgery internationally.

Background More than 1000 candidates applied for orthopaedic residency positions in 2014, and the competition is intense; approximately one-third of the candidates failed to secure a position in the match. However, the criteria used in the selection process often are subjective and studies have differed in terms of which criteria predict either objective measures or subjective ratings of resident performance by faculty. Questions/purposes Do preresidency selection factors serve as predictors of success in residency? Specifically, we asked which preresidency selection factors are associated or correlated with (1) objective measures of resident knowledge and performance; and (2) subjective ratings by faculty. Methods Charts of 60 orthopaedic residents from our institution were reviewed. Preresidency selection criteria examined included United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 and Step 2 scores, Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) scores, number of clinical clerkship honors, number of letters of recommendation, number of away rotations, Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) honor medical society membership, fourth-year subinternship at our institution, and number of publications. Resident performance was assessed using objective measures including American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) Part I scores and Orthopaedics In-Training Exam (OITE) scores and subjective ratings by faculty including global evaluation scores and faculty rankings of residents. We tested associations between preresidency criteria and the subsequent objective and subjective metrics using linear correlation analysis and Mann-Whitney tests when appropriate. Results Objective measures of resident performance namely, ABOS Part I scores, had a moderate linear correlation with the USMLE Step 2 scores (r = 0.55, p < 0.001) and number of clinical honors received in medical school (r = 0.45, p < 0.001). OITE scores had a weak linear correlation with the number of clinical honors (r = 0.35, p = 0.009) and USMLE Step 2 scores (r = 0.29, p = 0.02). With regards to subjective outcomes, AOA membership was associated with higher scores on the global evaluation (p = 0.005). AOA membership also correlated with higher global evaluation scores (r = 0.60, p = 0.005) with the strongest correlation existing between AOA membership and the “interpersonal and communication skills” subsection of the global evaluations. Conclusions We found that USMLE Step 2, number of honors in medical school clerkships, and AOA membership demonstrated the strongest correlations with resident performance. Our goal in analyzing these data was to provide residency programs at large a sense of which criteria may be “high yield” in ranking applicants by analyzing data from within our own pool of residents. Similar studies across a broader scope of programs are warranted to confirm applicability of our findings. The continually emerging complexities of the field of orthopaedic surgery lend increasing importance to future work on the appropriate selection and training of orthopaedic residents.

Background The influence of resident involvement on short-term outcomes after orthopaedic surgery is mostly unknown. Questions/purposes The purposes of our study were to examine the effects of resident involvement in surgical cases on short-term morbidity, mortality, operating time, hospital length of stay, and reoperation rate and to analyze these parameters by level of training. Methods The 2005–2011 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data set was queried using Current Procedural Terminology codes for 66,817 cases across six orthopaedic procedural domains: 28,686 primary total joint arthroplasties (TJAs), 2412 revision TJAs, 16,832 basic and 5916 advanced arthroscopies, 8221 lower extremity traumas, and 4750 spine arthrodeses (fusions). Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression and propensity scores were used to build models of risk adjustment. We compared the morbidity and mortality rates, length of operating time, hospital length of stay, and reoperation rate for cases with or without resident involvement. For cases with resident participation, we analyzed the same parameters by training level. Results Resident participation was associated with higher morbidity in TJAs (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; range, 1.4–1.9), lower extremity trauma (OR, 1.3; range, 1.2–1.5), and fusion (OR, 1.4; range, 1.2–1.7) after adjustment. However, resident involvement was not associated with increased mortality. Operative time was greater (all p < 0.001) with resident involvement in all procedural domains. Longer hospital length of stay was associated with resident participation in lower extremity trauma (p < 0.001) and fusion cases (p = 0.003), but resident participation did not affect length of stay in other domains. Resident involvement was associated with greater 30-day reoperation rates for cases of lower extremity trauma (p = 0.041) and fusion (p < 0.001). Level of resident training did not consistently influence surgical outcomes. Conclusions Results of our study suggest resident involvement in surgical procedures is not associated with increased short-term major morbidity and mortality after select cases in orthopaedic surgery. Findings of longer operating times and differences in minor morbidity should lead to future initiatives to provide resident surgical skills training and improve perioperative efficiency in the academic setting. Level of Evidence Level II, prognostic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Video learning prior to surgery is common practice for trainees and surgeons, and immersive virtual reality (IVR) simulators are of increasing interest for surgical training. The training effectiveness of IVR compared with video training in complex skill acquisition should be studied. To evaluate whether IVR improves learning effectiveness for surgical trainees and to validate a VR rating scale through correlation to real-world performance. This block randomized, intervention-controlled clinical trial included senior (ie, postgraduate year 4 and 5) orthopedic surgery residents from multiple institutions in Canada during a single training course. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed. Data were collected from January 30 to February 1, 2020. An IVR training platform providing a case-based module for reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for advanced rotator cuff tear arthropathy. Participants were permitted to repeat the module indefinitely. The primary outcome measure was a validated performance metric for both the intervention and control groups (Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills [OSATS]). Secondary measures included transfer of training (ToT), transfer effectiveness ratio (TER), and cost-effectiveness (CER) ratios of IVR training compared with control. Additional secondary measures included IVR performance metrics measured on a novel rating scale compared with real-world performance. A total of 18 senior surgical residents participated; 9 (50%) were randomized to the IVR group and 9 (50%) to the control group. Participant demographic characteristics were not different for age (mean [SD] age: IVR group, 31.1 [2.8] years; control group, 31.0 [2.7] years), gender (IVR group, 8 [89%] men; control group, 6 [67%] men), surgical experience (mean [SD] experience with RSA: IVR group, 3.3 [0.9]; control group, 3.2 [0.4]), or prior simulator use (had experience: IVR group 6 [67%]; control group, 4 [44%]). The IVR group completed training 387% faster considering a single repetition (mean [SD] time for IVR group: 4.1 [2.5] minutes; mean [SD] time for control group: 16.1 [2.6] minutes; difference, 12.0 minutes; 95% CI, 8.8-14.0 minutes; P < .001). The IVR group had significantly better mean (SD) OSATS scores than the control group (15.9 [2.5] vs 9.4 [3.2]; difference, 6.9; 95% CI, 3.3-9.7; P < .001). The IVR group also demonstrated higher mean (SD) verbal questioning scores (4.1 [1.0] vs 2.2 [1.7]; difference, 1.9; 95% CI, 0.1-3.3; P = .03). The IVR score (ie, Precision Score) had a strong correlation to real-world OSATS scores (r = 0.74) and final implant position (r = 0.73). The ToT was 59.4%, based on the OSATS score. The TER was 0.79, and the system was 34 times more cost-effective than control, based on CER. In this study, surgical training with IVR demonstrated superior learning efficiency, knowledge, and skill transfer. The TER of 0.79 substituted for 47.4 minutes of operating room time when IVR was used for 60 minutes. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04404010.

Orthopedic procedures represent a large expense to the Medicare program, and costs of implantable medical devices account for a large proportion of those procedures' costs. Physicians have been encouraged to consider cost in the selection of devices, but several factors make acquiring cost information difficult. To assess physicians' levels of knowledge about costs, we asked orthopedic attending physicians and residents at seven academic medical centers to estimate the costs of thirteen commonly used orthopedic devices between December 2012 and March 2013. The actual cost of each device was determined at each institution; estimates within 20 percent of the actual cost were considered correct. Among the 503 physicians who completed our survey, attending physicians correctly estimated the cost of the device 21 percent of the time, and residents did so 17 percent of the time. Thirty-six percent of physicians and 75 percent of residents rated their knowledge of device costs \"below average\" or \"poor.\" However, more than 80 percent of all respondents indicated that cost should be \"moderately,\" \"very,\" or \"extremely' important in the device selection process. Surgeons need increased access to information on the relative prices of devices and should be incentivized to participate in cost containment efforts. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Background More than 15 years ago, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) identified medical error as a problem worthy of greater attention; in the wake of the IOM report, numerous changes were made to regulations to limit residents’ duty hours. However, the effect of resident work-hour changes remains controversial within the field of orthopaedics. Questions/purposes We performed a systematic review to determine whether work-hour restrictions have measurably influenced quality-of-life measures, operative and technical skill development, resident surgical education, patient care outcomes (including mortality, morbidity, adverse events, sentinel events, complications), and surgeon and resident attitudes (such as perceived effect on learning and training experiences, personal benefit, direct clinical experience, clinical preparedness). Methods We performed a systematic review of PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and Google Scholar using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Inclusion criteria were any English language peer-reviewed articles that analyzed the effect(s) of orthopaedic surgery resident work-hour restrictions on patient safety, resident education, resident/surgeon quality of life, resident technical operative skill development, and resident surgeon attitudes toward work-hour restrictions. Eleven studies met study inclusion criteria. One study was a prospective analysis, whereas 10 studies were of level IV evidence (review of surgical case logs) or survey results. Results Within our identified studies, there was some support for improved resident quality of life, improved resident sleep and less fatigue, a perceived negative impact on surgical operative and technical skill, and conflicting evidence on the topic of resident education, patient outcomes, and variable attitudes toward the work-hour changes. Conclusions There is a paucity of high-level or clear evidence evaluating the effect of the changes to resident work hours. Future research in this area should focus on objective measures that include patient safety as a primary outcome.

Background Musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions are common, and their burden on the healthcare system is increasing as the general population ages. It is essential that medical students be well prepared to evaluate and treat MSK disorders in a confident manner as they enter the workforce. Recent studies and the American Association of Medical Colleges have raised concern that medical schools may not give sufficient instruction on this topic. Other authors have shown that preclinical instruction has increased over the past decade; however, it is unclear if required clinical instruction also has followed that trend. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study were: (1) to assess the presence and duration of required or selective instruction in a MSK medicine specialty within the clinical years of undergraduate medical education; and (2) to assess the current state of requirements of clinical clerkships or rotations in other surgical and nonsurgical fields for comparison with the initial findings. Methods The web sites of all 141 US medical schools were assessed to determine the content of their clinical curricula for the 2014–2015 academic year; five were excluded because they had not yet had a graduating class by the conclusion of the 2014–2015 academic year. Complete information on required rotations was obtained through the schools’ web sites for all 136 (100%) medical schools. For selective experience during the surgery clerkships, complete information was available for 130 of the remaining 136 (96%) web sites. Results Mean (in weeks, ± SD) duration of core clerkships were as follows: internal medicine (10 ± 2), surgery (8 ± 2), pediatrics (7 ± 1), obstetrics/gynecology (6 ± 1), and psychiatry (5 ± 1). Other common required clerkships were: family medicine (required in 96% [131 of 136] of schools, mean duration of 6 ± 2 weeks), neurology (81% [110], 4 ± 1), and emergency medicine (55% [75], 3 ± 1). Required MSK instruction, at a mean of 2 ± 1 weeks, was only present in 15% (20 of 136) of medical schools. In addition, clinical MSK instruction was offered as a selective (eg, students pick from a selection of subspecialties such as orthopaedics, plastics, or urology during a general surgery clerkship) in 34% (44 of 130) of all medical schools. This is less than other non-core specialties: geriatrics/ambulatory care (required in 40% [54 of 136] of schools, mean duration of 3 ± 1 weeks), critical care (30% [41], mean of 3 ± 1 weeks), radiology (26% [35], mean of 3 ± 1 weeks), anesthesiology (23% [31], mean of 2 ± 1 weeks), and other surgical subspecialties (19% [26], mean of 3 ± 1weeks). Conclusions Traditional core clerkships continue to be well represented in the clinical years, whereas three newer specialties have gained a larger presence: family medicine, neurology, and emergency medicine; these comprise the “big eight” of clinical clerkships. Given the high prevalence and burden of MSK disorders, required experience in MSK medicine continues to be underrepresented. Further discussion at a national level is needed to determine appropriate representation of MSK medicine specialties during the clinical years.

Background Although simulation-based training is becoming widespread in surgical education and research supports its use, one major limitation is cost. Until now, little has been published on the costs of simulation in residency training. At the University of Toronto, a novel competency-based curriculum in orthopaedic surgery has been implemented for training selected residents, which makes extensive use of simulation. Despite the benefits of this intensive approach to simulation, there is a need to consider its financial implications and demands on faculty time. Questions/purposes This study presents a cost and faculty work-hours analysis of implementing simulation as a teaching and evaluation tool in the University of Toronto’s novel competency-based curriculum program compared with the historic costs of using simulation in the residency training program. Methods All invoices for simulation training were reviewed to determine the financial costs before and after implementation of the competency-based curriculum. Invoice items included costs for cadavers, artificial models, skills laboratory labor, associated materials, and standardized patients. Costs related to the surgical skills laboratory rental fees and orthopaedic implants were waived as a result of special arrangements with the skills laboratory and implant vendors. Although faculty time was not reimbursed, faculty hours dedicated to simulation were also evaluated. The academic year of 2008 to 2009 was chosen to represent an academic year that preceded the introduction of the competency-based curriculum. During this year, 12 residents used simulation for teaching. The academic year of 2010 to 2011 was chosen to represent an academic year when the competency-based curriculum training program was functioning parallel but separate from the regular stream of training. In this year, six residents used simulation for teaching and assessment. The academic year of 2012 to 2013 was chosen to represent an academic year when simulation was used equally among the competency-based curriculum and regular stream residents for teaching (60 residents) and among 14 competency-based curriculum residents and 21 regular stream residents for assessment. Results The total costs of using simulation to teach and assess all residents in the competency-based curriculum and regular stream programs (academic year 2012–2013) (CDN 155,750, USD 158,050) were approximately 15 times higher than the cost of using simulation to teach residents before the implementation of the competency-based curriculum (academic year 2008–2009) (CDN 10,090, USD 11,140). The number of hours spent teaching and assessing trainees increased from 96 to 317 hours during this period, representing a threefold increase. Conclusions Although the financial costs and time demands on faculty in running the simulation program in the new competency-based curriculum at the University of Toronto have been substantial, augmented learner and trainer satisfaction has been accompanied by direct evidence of improved and more efficient learning outcomes. Clinical Relevance The higher costs and demands on faculty time associated with implementing simulation for teaching and assessment must be considered when it is used to enhance surgical training.

Background Effective humanitarian surgeons require skills in general surgery, OB/GYN, orthopedics, and urology. With increasing specialization, it is unclear whether US general surgery residents are receiving exposure to these disparate fields. We sought to assess the preparedness of graduating American surgical residents for humanitarian deployment. Methods We retrospectively analyzed cases performed by American College of Graduate Medical Education general surgery graduates from 2009 to 2015 and cases performed at select Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) facilities from 2008 to 2012. Cases were categorized by specialty (general surgery, orthopedics, OB/GYN, urology) and compared with Chi-squared testing. Non-operative care including basic wound and drain care was excluded from both data sets. Results US general surgery residents performed 41.3% MSF relevant general surgery cases, 1.9% orthopedic cases, 0.1% OB/GYN cases, and 0.3% urology cases; the remaining 56.4% of cases exceeded the standard MSF scope of care. In comparison, MSF cases were 30.1% general surgery, 21.2% orthopedics, 46.8% OB/GYN, and 1.9% urology. US residents performed fewer OB/GYN cases ( p  < 0.01) and fewer orthopedic cases ( p  < 0.01). Differences in general surgery and urology caseloads were not statistically significant. Key procedures in which residents lacked experience included cesarean sections, hysterectomies, and external bony fixation. Conclusion Current US surgical training is poorly aligned with typical MSF surgical caseloads, particularly in OB/GYN and orthopedics. New mechanisms for obtaining relevant surgical skills should be developed to better prepare American surgical trainees interested in humanitarian work.