Incoming residents' knot-tying and suturing skills: Are medical school boot camps sufficient?

INTRODUCTION: Many medical schools offer M4 boot camps to improve students' preparedness for surgical residencies. For three consecutive years, we investigated the impact of medical school boot camps on intern knot-tying and suturing skills when measured at the start of residency. METHODS: Forty-two interns completed questionnaires regarding their boot camp experiences. Their performance on knot-tying and suturing exercises was scored by three surgeons blinded to the questionnaire results. A comparison of these scores of interns with or without boot camp experiences was performed and statistical analysis applied. RESULTS: 26 of 42 (62%) interns reported boot camp training. There were no differences in scores between interns with or without a M4 boot camp experience for suturing [9.6(4.6) vs 9.8(4.1), p < 0.908], knot-tying [9.1(3.6) vs 8.4(4.1), p = 0.574], overall performance [2.0(0.6) vs 1.9(0.7), p = 0.424], and quality [2.0(0.6) vs 1.9(0.7), p = 0.665]) (mean(SD)). CONCLUSIONS: We could not demonstrate a statistically significant benefit in knot-tying and suturing skills of students who enrolled in M4 boot camp courses as measured at the start of surgical residency.

Resident perception of fundamental endoscopic skills exam: a single institution's experience.

BACKGROUND: Graduating general surgery residents are required to pass the FES exam for ABS certification. Trainees and surgery educators are interested in defining the most effective methods of exam preparation. Our aim is to define trainee perceptions, performance, and the most effective preparation methods regarding the FES exam. METHODS: General surgery residents from a single institution who completed the FES exam were identified. All participated in a flexible endoscopy rotation, and all had access to an endoscopy simulator. Residents were surveyed regarding preparation methods and exam difficulty. Descriptive statistics and a Kruskal-Wallis test were used. RESULTS: A total of 26 trainees took the FES exam with a first-time pass rate of 96.2%. Of 26 surveys administered, 21 were completed. Twenty trainees (76.9%) participated in a dedicated endoscopy curriculum. Scores were not different among those who received dedicated curricular instruction compared to those who did not (547 [IQR 539-562.5] vs. 516 [484.5-547], p = 0.1484; 535.5 [468.5-571] vs. 519 [464.75-575], p = 0.9514). Written exam difficulty was rated as 5.5 on a 10-point Likert scale, and 85.7% felt it was a fair assessment of endoscopy knowledge; skills exam difficulty was rated as 7, and 71% felt it was a fair assessment of endoscopy skills. Online FES modules, the endoscopy clinical rotation, and an exam preparation session with a faculty member were most effective for written exam preparation. The most effective skills exam preparation methods were independent simulator practice, the endoscopy clinical rotation, and a preparation session with a faculty member. The most difficult skills were loop reduction and retroflexion. Skill decay did not appear to be significant. CONCLUSIONS: A clinical endoscopy rotation, a method for independent skills practice, and faculty-mediated exam instruction appear to be effective exam preparation methods. When these are present, trainees report minimal need for dedicated exam preparation time prior to taking the FES exam.