Characteristics and Practice Patterns of Non-certified Surgeons Treating Medicare Patients.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to explore the patient characteristics and practice patterns of non-certified surgeons who treat Medicare patients in the United States. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: While most surgeons in the United States are board-certified, non-certified surgeons are permitted to practice in many locations. At the same time, surgical workforce shortages threaten access to surgical care for many patients. It is possible that non-certified surgeons may be able to help fill these access gaps. However, little is known about the practice patterns of non-certified surgeons. METHODS: A 100% sample of Medicare claims data from 2014-2019 were used to identify practicing general surgeons. Surgeons were categorized as certified or non-certified in general surgery​​ based on data from the American Board of Surgery. Surgeon practice patterns and patient characteristics were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 2,097,206 patient cases were included in the study. These patients were treated by 16,076 surgeons, of which 6% were identified as non-certified surgeons. Compared to certified surgeons, non-certified surgeons were less frequently fellowship-trained (20.5% vs. 24.2%, P=0.008) and more likely to be a foreign medical graduate (14.5% vs. 9.2%, P<0.001). Non-certified surgeons were more frequently practicing in for-profit hospitals (21.2% vs. 14.2%, P<0.001) and critical access hospitals (2.2% vs. 1.3%, P<0.001), and were less likely to practice in a teaching hospital (63.2% vs. 72.4%, P<0.001). Compared to certified surgeons, non-certified surgeons treated more non-White patients (19.6% vs. 14%, P<0.001) as well as a higher percentage of patients in the two lowest socioeconomic status (SES) quintiles (36.2% vs. 29.2%, P<0.001). Operations related to emergency admissions were more common amongst non-certified surgeons (68.8% vs. 55.7%, P<0.001). There were no differences in gender or age of the patients treated by certified and non-certified surgeons. CONCLUSION: For Medicare patients, non-certified surgeons treated more patients who are non-White, of lower SES, and in more rural, critical-access hospitals.

Mortality and Severe Complications Among Newly Graduated Surgeons in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate severe complications and mortality over years of independent practice among general surgeons. BACKGROUND: Despite concerns that newly graduated general surgeons may be unprepared for independent practice, it is unclear whether patient outcomes differ between early and later career surgeons. METHODS: We used Medicare claims for patients discharged between July 1, 2007 and December 31, 2019 to evaluate 30-day severe complications and mortality for 26 operations defined as core procedures by the American Board of Surgery. Generalized additive mixed models were used to assess the association between surgeon years in practice and 30-day outcomes while adjusting for differences in patient, hospital, and surgeon characteristics. RESULTS: The cohort included 1,329,358 operations performed by 14,399 surgeons. In generalized mixed models, the relative risk (RR) of mortality was higher among surgeons in their first year of practice compared with surgeons in their 15th year of practice [5.5% (95% CI: 4.1%-7.3%) vs 4.7% (95% CI: 3.5%-6.3%), RR: 1.17 (95% CI: 1.11-1.22)]. Similarly, the RR of severe complications was higher among surgeons in their first year of practice compared with surgeons in their 15th year of practice [7.5% (95% CI: 6.6%-8.5%) versus 6.9% (95% CI: 6.1%-7.9%), RR: 1.08 (95% CI: 1.03-1.14)]. When stratified by individual operation, 21 operations had a significantly higher RR of mortality and all 26 operations had a significantly higher RR of severe complications in the first compared with the 15th year of practice. CONCLUSIONS: Among general surgeons performing common operations, rates of mortality and severe complications were higher among newly graduated surgeons compared with later career surgeons.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Operative Experience Among General Surgery Residents: A Multi-Institutional Study from the US ROPE Consortium.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between race/ethnicity and case volume among graduating surgical residents. BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic minority individuals face barriers to entry and advancement in surgery; however, no large-scale investigations of the operative experience of racial/ethnic minority residents have been performed. METHODS: A multi-institutional retrospective analysis of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education case logs of categorical general surgery residents at 20 programs in the US Resident OPerative Experience Consortium database was performed. All residents graduating between 2010 and 2020 were included. The total, surgeon chief, surgeon junior, and teaching assistant case volumes were compared between racial/ethnic groups. RESULTS: The cohort included 1343 residents. There were 211 (15.7%) Asian, 65 (4.8%) Black, 73 (5.4%) Hispanic, 71 (5.3%) "Other" (Native American or Multiple Race), and 923 (68.7%) White residents. On adjusted analysis, Black residents performed 76 fewer total cases (95% CI, -109 to -43, P <0.001) and 69 fewer surgeon junior cases (-98 to -40, P <0.001) than White residents. Comparing adjusted total case volume by graduation year, both Black residents and White residents performed more cases over time; however, there was no difference in the rates of annual increase (10 versus 12 cases per year increase, respectively, P =0.769). Thus, differences in total case volume persisted over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: In this multi-institutional study, Black residents graduated with lower case volume than non-minority residents throughout the previous decade. Reduced operative learning opportunities may negatively impact professional advancement. Systemic interventions are needed to promote equitable operative experience and positive culture change.

Disparities in the Operative Experience Between Female and Male General Surgery Residents: A Multi-institutional Study From the US ROPE Consortium.

OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in resident operative experience between male and female general surgery residents. BACKGROUND: Despite increasing female representation in surgery, sex and gender disparities in residency experience continue to exist. The operative volume of male and female general surgery residents has not been compared on a multi-institutional level. METHODS: Demographic characteristics and case logs were obtained for categorical general surgery graduates between 2010 and 2020 from the US Resident OPerative Experience Consortium database. Univariable, multivariable, and linear regression analyses were performed to compare differences in operative experience between male and female residents. RESULTS: There were 1343 graduates from 20 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited programs, and 476 (35%) were females. There were no differences in age, race/ethnicity, or proportion pursuing fellowship between groups. Female graduates were less likely to be high-volume residents (27% vs 36%, P < 0.01). On univariable analysis, female graduates performed fewer total cases than male graduates (1140 vs 1177, P < 0.01), largely due to a diminished surgeon junior experience (829 vs 863, P < 0.01). On adjusted multivariable analysis, female sex was negatively associated with being a high-volume resident (OR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.98, P = 0.03). Over the 11-year study period, the annual total number of cases increased significantly for both groups, but female graduates (+16 cases/year) outpaced male graduates (+13 cases/year, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Female general surgery graduates performed significantly fewer cases than male graduates. Reassuringly, this gap in operative experience may be narrowing. Further interventions are warranted to promote equitable training opportunities that support and engage female residents.

Early findings and strategies for successful implementation of SIMPL workplace-based assessments within vascular surgery residency and fellowship programs.

OBJECTIVE: As medical education systems increasingly move toward competency-based training, it is important to understand the tools available to assess competency and how these tools are utilized. The Society for Improving Medical Professional Learning (SIMPL) offers a smart phone-based assessment system that supports workplace-based assessment of residents' and fellows' operative autonomy, performance, and case complexity. The purpose of this study was to characterize implementation of the SIMPL app within vascular surgery integrated residency (0+5) and fellowship (5+2) training programs. METHODS: SIMPL operative ratings recorded between 2018 and 2022 were collected from all participating vascular surgery training institutions (n = 9 institutions with 5+2 and 0+5 programs; n = 4 institutions with 5+2 program only). The characteristics of programs, trainees, faculty, and SIMPL operative assessments were evaluated using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Operative assessments were completed for 2457 cases by 85 attendings and 86 trainees, totaling 4615 unique operative assessment ratings. Attendings included dictated feedback in 52% of assessments. Senior-level residents received more assessments than junior-level residents (postgraduate year [PGY]1-3, n = 439; PGY4-5, n = 551). Performance ratings demonstrated increases from junior to senior trainees for both resident and fellow cohorts with "performance-ready" or "exceptional performance" ratings increasing by nearly two-fold for PGY1 to PGY5 residents (28.1% vs 40.6%), and from first- to second-year fellows (PGY6, 46.7%; PGY7, 60.3%). Similar gains in autonomy were demonstrated as trainees progressed through training. Senior residents were more frequently granted autonomy with "supervision only" than junior residents (PGY1, 8.7%; PGY5, 21.6%). "Supervision only" autonomy ratings were granted to 21.8% of graduating fellows. Assessment data included a greater proportion of complex cases for senior compared with junior fellows (PGY6, 20.9% vs PGY7, 26.5%). Program Directors felt that faculty and trainee buy-in were the main barriers to implementation of the SIMPL assessment app. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first description of the SIMPL app as an operative assessment tool within vascular surgery that has been successfully implemented in both residency and fellowship programs. The assessment data demonstrates expected progressive gains in trainees' autonomy and performance, as well as increasing case complexity, across PGY years. Given the selection of SIMPL as the assessment platform for required American Board of Surgery and Vascular Surgery Board Entrustable Professional Activities assessments, understanding facilitators and barriers to implementation of workplace-based assessments using this app is imperative, particularly as we move toward competency-based medical education.

The Demands of Surgery Residency: More Than Just Duty Hours?

INTRODUCTION: Efforts to improve surgical resident well-being could be accelerated with an improved understanding of resident job demands and resources. In this study, we sought to obtain a clearer picture of surgery resident job demands by assessing how residents distribute their time both inside and outside of the hospital. Furthermore, we aimed to elucidate residents' perceptions about current duty hour regulations. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was sent to 1098 surgical residents at 27 US programs. Responses regarding work hours, demographics, well-being (utilizing the physician well-being index), and perceptions of duty hours in relation to education and rest, were collected. Data were evaluated using descriptive statistics and content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 163 residents (14.8% response rate) were included in the study. Residents reported a median total patient care hours per week of 78.0 h. Trainees spent 12.5 h on other professional activities. Greater than 40% of residents were "at risk" for depression and suicide based on physician well-being index scores. Four major themes associated with education and rest were identified: 1) duty hour definitions and reporting mechanisms do not completely reflect the amount of work residents perform, 2) quality patient care and educational opportunities do not fit neatly within the duty hour framework, 3) resident perceptions of duty hours are impacted the educational environment, and 4) long work hours and lack of adequate rest negatively affect well-being. CONCLUSIONS: The breadth and depth of trainee job demands are not accurately captured by current duty hour reporting mechanisms, and residents do not believe that their current work hours allow for adequate rest or even completion of other clinical or academic tasks outside of the hospital. Many residents are unwell. Duty hour policies and resident well-being may be improved with a more holistic accounting of resident job demands and greater attention to the resources that residents have to offset those demands.

Implementation of a Smartphone-Based Platform for Operative Feedback at Tenwek Hospital in Kenya: A Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The SIMPL operative feedback tool is used in many U.S. surgical residency programs. However, the challenges of implementation and benefits of the web-based platform in low- and middle-income countries are unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate implementation of SIMPL in a general surgery residency training program in Kenya. METHODS: SIMPL was pilot tested at Tenwek Hospital from January through December 2021. Participant perspectives of SIMPL were elicited through a survey and semi-structured interviews. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze survey data. Inductive qualitative content analysis of interview responses was performed by two independent researchers. RESULTS: Fourteen residents and six faculty (100% response rate) were included in the study and completed over 600 operative assessments. All respondents reported numerical evaluations and dictated feedback were useful. Respondents felt that SIMPL was easy to use, improved quality and frequency of feedback, helped refine surgical skills, and increased resident autonomy. Barriers to use included participants forgetting to complete evaluations, junior residents not submitting evaluations when minimally involved in cases, and technological challenges. Suggestions for improvement included expansion of SIMPL to surgical subspecialties and allowing senior residents to provide feedback to juniors. All respondents wanted to continue using SIMPL, and 90% recommended use at other programs. CONCLUSION: Residents and faculty at Tenwek Hospital believed SIMPL were a positive addition to their training program. There were a few barriers to use and suggestions for improvement specific to the training environment in Kenya, but this study demonstrates it is feasible to use SIMPL in settings outside the U.S. with the appropriate resources.

The Quality of Operative Performance Narrative Feedback: A Retrospective Data Comparison Between End of Rotation Evaluations and Workplace-based Assessments.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the quality of operative performance feedback using evaluation tools commonly used by general surgery residency training programs. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The majority of surgical training programs administer an evaluation through which faculty members may rate and comment on trainee operative performance at the end of the rotation (EOR). Many programs have also implemented the system for improving and measuring procedural learning (SIMPL), a workplace-based assessment tool with which faculty can rate and comment on a trainee's operative performance immediately after a case. It is unknown how the quality of narrative operative performance feedback delivered with these tools compares. METHODS: The authors collected EOR evaluations and SIMPL narrative comments on trainees' operative performance from 3 university-based surgery training programs during the 2016-2017 academic year. Two surgeon raters categorized comments relating to operative skills as being specific or general and as encouraging and/or corrective. Comments were then classified as effective, mediocre, ineffective, or irrelevant. The frequencies with which comments were rated as effective were compared using Chi-square analysis. RESULTS: The authors analyzed a total of 600 comments. 10.7% of EOR and 58.3% of SIMPL operative performance evaluation comments were deemed effective (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Evaluators give significantly higher quality operative performance feedback when using workplace-based assessment tools rather than EOR evaluations.

Surgical Trainee Performance and Alignment With Surgical Program Director Expectations.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the alignment between graduating surgical trainee operative performance and a prior survey of surgical program director expectations. BACKGROUND: Surgical trainee operative training is expected to prepare residents to independently perform clinically important surgical procedures. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study of US general surgery residents' rated operative performance for Core general surgery procedures. Residents' expected performance on those procedures at the time of graduation was compared to the current list of Core general surgery procedures ranked by their importance for clinical practice, as assessed via a previous national survey of general surgery program directors. We also examined the frequency of individual procedures logged by residents over the course of their training. RESULTS: Operative performance ratings for 29,885 procedures performed by 1861 surgical residents in 54 general surgery programs were analyzed. For each Core general surgery procedure, adjusted mean probability of a graduating resident being deemed practice-ready ranged from 0.59 to 0.99 (mean 0.90, standard deviation 0.08). There was weak correlation between the readiness of trainees to independently perform a procedure at the time of graduation and that procedure's historical importance to clinical practice ( p = 0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.41, P = 0.06). Residents also continue to have limited opportunities to learn many procedures that are important for clinical practice. CONCLUSION: The operative performance of graduating general surgery residents may not be well aligned with surgical program director expectations.

A Proposed Blueprint for Operative Performance Training, Assessment, and Certification.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to propose an evidence-based blueprint for training, assessment, and certification of operative performance for surgical trainees. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Operative skill is a critical aspect of surgical performance. High-quality assessment of operative skill therefore has profound implications for training, accreditation, certification, and the public trust of the profession. Current methods of operative skill assessment for surgeons rely heavily on global assessment strategies across a very broad domain of procedures. There is no mechanism to assure technical competence for individual procedures. The science and scalability of operative skill assessment has progressed significantly in recent decades, and can inform a much more meaningful strategy for competency-based assessment of operative skill than has been previously achieved. METHODS: The present article reviews the current status and science of operative skill assessment and proposes a template for competency-based assessment which could be used to update training, accreditation, and certification processes. The proposal is made in reference to general surgery but is more generally applicable to other procedural specialties. RESULTS: Streamlined, routine assessment of every procedure performed by surgical trainees is feasible and would enable a more competency-based educational paradigm. In light of the constraints imposed by both clinical volume and assessment bias, trainees should be expected to become proficient and be measured against a mastery learning standard only for the most important and highest-frequency procedures. For less frequently observed procedures, performance can be compared to a norm-referenced standard and, to provide an overall trajectory of performance, analyzed in aggregate. Key factors in implementing this approach are the number of evaluations, the number of raters, the timeliness of evaluation, and evaluation items. CONCLUSIONS: A competency-based operative skill assessment can be incorporated into surgical training, assessment, and certification. The time has come to develop a systematic approach to this issue as a means of demonstrating professional standards worthy of the public trust.

Is Initial Board Certification Associated With Better Early Career Surgical Outcomes?

OBJECTIVE: To determine if initial American Board of Surgery certification in general surgery is associated with better risk-adjusted patient outcomes for Medicare patients undergoing partial colectomy by an early career surgeon. BACKGROUND: Board certification is a voluntary commitment to professionalism, continued learning, and delivery of high-quality patient care. Not all surgeons are certified, and some have questioned the value of certification due to limited evidence that board-certified surgeons have better patient outcomes. In response, we examined the outcomes of certified versus noncertified early career general surgeons. METHODS: We identified Medicare patients who underwent a partial colectomy between 2008 and 2016 and were operated on by a non-subspecialty trained surgeon within their first 5 years of practice. Surgeon certification status was determined using the American Board of Surgery data. Generalized linear mixed models were used to control for patient-, procedure-, and hospital-level effects. Primary outcomes were the occurrence of severe complications and occurrence of death within 30 days. RESULTS: We identified 69,325 patients who underwent a partial colectomy by an early career general surgeon. The adjusted rate of severe complications after partial colectomy by certified (n = 4239) versus noncertified (n = 191) early-career general surgeons was 9.1% versus 10.7% (odds ratio 0.83, P = 0.03). Adjusted mortality rate for certified versus noncertified early-career general surgeons was 4.9% versus 6.1% (odds ratio 0.79, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing partial colectomy by an early career general surgeon have decreased odds of severe complications and death when their surgeon is board certified.

SIMPLifying Urology Residency Operative Assessments: A Pilot Study in Urology Training.

PURPOSE: The Society for Improving Medical Professional Learning (SIMPL) app is an innovative, convenient and validated smartphone-based tool to evaluate residents' operative performance. In this study, we describe the initial implementation of SIMPL in our program's pediatric urology rotation-the first among urology residencies-and provide preliminary data on its adoption by residents and faculty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Residents and faculty in our pediatric urology division submitted SIMPL evaluations following surgical cases from August 2019 to July 2020. Evaluations consisted of ratings in 3 domains: resident autonomy, resident operative performance and patient-related case complexity. An online survey was also used to gauge attitudes towards SIMPL, describe patterns of use and solicit feedback on areas for improvement. RESULTS: Eight residents and 6 faculty submitted 141 evaluations, with 76.6% of evaluated cases having both faculty and resident ratings. Verbal feedback was included in 94.2%. Faculty-resident agreement ranged from 68.6% to 75.2% (kappa=0.47 to 0.61). Faculty rated postgraduate year (PGY)-4 residents as more autonomous (p=0.040) and higher performing (p=0.028) than PGY-3 residents. All participants agreed that SIMPL was easy to use and compared favorably to existing avenues of feedback. Barriers to implementation included lack of reminders for evaluations and evaluation fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: The SIMPL application improved both frequency and quality of resident operative feedback. Among participants, SIMPL was preferred over the existing feedback system at our institution.

How Many Observations are Needed to Assess a Surgical Trainee's State of Operative Competency?

OBJECTIVE: To establish the number of operative performance observations needed for reproducible assessments of operative competency. BACKGROUND: Surgical training is transitioning from a time-based to a competency-based approach, but the number of assessments needed to reliably establish operative competency remains unknown. METHODS: Using a smart phone based operative evaluation application (SIMPL), residents from 13 general surgery training programs were evaluated performing common surgical procedures. Two competency metrics were investigated separately: autonomy and overall performance. Analyses were performed for laparoscopic cholecystectomy performances alone and for all operative procedures combined. Variance component analyses determined operative performance score variance attributable to resident operative competency and measurement error. Generalizability and decision studies determined number of assessments needed to achieve desired reliability (0.80 or greater) and determine standard errors of measurement. RESULTS: For laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 23 ratings are needed to achieve reproducible autonomy ratings and 17 ratings are needed to achieve reproducible overall operative performance ratings. For the undifferentiated mix of procedures, 60 ratings are needed to achieve reproducible autonomy ratings and 40 are needed for reproducible overall operative performance ratings. CONCLUSION: The number of observations needed to achieve reproducible assessments of operative competency far exceeds current certification requirements, yet remains an important and achievable goal. Attention should also be paid to the mix of cases and raters in order to assure fair judgments about operative competency and fair comparisons of trainees.

Readiness of US General Surgery Residents for Independent Practice.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates the current state of the General Surgery (GS) residency training model by investigating resident operative performance and autonomy. BACKGROUND: The American Board of Surgery has designated 132 procedures as being "Core" to the practice of GS. GS residents are expected to be able to safely and independently perform those procedures by the time they graduate. There is growing concern that not all residents achieve that standard. Lack of operative autonomy may play a role. METHODS: Attendings in 14 General Surgery programs were trained to use a) the 5-level System for Improving and Measuring Procedural Learning (SIMPL) Performance scale to assess resident readiness for independent practice and b) the 4-level Zwisch scale to assess the level of guidance (ie, autonomy) they provided to residents during specific procedures. Ratings were collected immediately after cases that involved a categorical GS resident. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and supplemented with Bayesian ordinal model-based estimation. RESULTS: A total of 444 attending surgeons rated 536 categorical residents after 10,130 procedures. Performance: from the first to the last year of training, the proportion of Performance ratings for Core procedures (n = 6931) at "Practice Ready" or above increased from 12.3% to 77.1%. The predicted probability that a typical trainee would be rated as Competent after performing an average Core procedure on an average complexity patient during the last week of residency training is 90.5% (95% CI: 85.7%-94%). This falls to 84.6% for more complex patients and to less than 80% for more difficult Core procedures. Autonomy: for all procedures, the proportion of Zwisch ratings indicating meaningful autonomy ("Passive Help" or "Supervision Only") increased from 15.1% to 65.7% from the first to the last year of training. For the Core procedures performed by residents in their final 6 months of training (cholecystectomy, inguinal/femoral hernia repair, appendectomy, ventral hernia repair, and partial colectomy), the proportion of Zwisch ratings (n = 357) indicating near-independence ("Supervision Only") was 33.3%. CONCLUSIONS: US General Surgery residents are not universally ready to independently perform Core procedures by the time they complete residency training. Progressive resident autonomy is also limited. It is unknown if the amount of autonomy residents do achieve is sufficient to ensure readiness for the entire spectrum of independent practice.

Evaluation of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Residents' Operative Skills: Feasibility and Engagement Study Using SIMPL Software for a Mobile Phone.

PURPOSE: There are no universally accepted tools to evaluate operative skills of surgical residents in a timely fashion. The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of using a smartphone application, SIMPL (System for Improving and Measuring Procedural Learning), developed by a multi-institutional research collaborative, to achieve a high rate of timely operative evaluations and resident communication and to collect performance data. The authors hypothesized that these goals would be achieved because the process is convenient and efficient. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective feasibility and engagement study using SIMPL to evaluate residents' operative skills. SIMPL requires the attending surgeon to answer 3 multiple-choice questions: 1) What level of help (Zwisch Scale) was required by the trainee? 2) What was the level of performance? 3) How complex was the case? The evaluator also can dictate a narrative. The sample was composed of 3 faculty members and 3 volunteer senior residents. Predictor variables were the surgeons, trainees, and procedures performed. Outcome variables included number and percentage of procedures performed by faculty-and-resident pairs assessed, time required to complete assessments, time lapsed to submission, percentage of assessments with narratives, and residents' response rates. RESULTS: From March through June 2016, 151 procedures were performed in the operating room by the faculty-and-resident teams. There were 107 assessments submitted (71%). Resident response (self-assessment) to faculty evaluations was 81%. Recorded time to complete assessments (n = 75 of 107) was shorter than 2 minutes. The time lapsed to submission was shorter than 72 hours (100%). Dictations were submitted for 35 evaluations (33%). Data for the type of help, performance, and complexity of cases were collected for each resident. CONCLUSIONS: SIMPL facilitates timely intraoperative evaluations of surgical skills, engagement by faculty and residents, and collection of detailed procedural data. Additional prospective trials to assess this tool further are planned.

Improving Graduate Medical Education by Aggregating Data Across the Medical Education Continuum.

ABSTRACT: Meaningful improvements to graduate medical education (GME) have been achieved in recent decades, yet many GME improvement pilots have been small trials without rigorous outcome measures and with limited generalizability. Thus, lack of access to large-scale data is a key barrier to generating empiric evidence to improve GME. In this article, the authors examine the potential of a national GME data infrastructure to improve GME, review the output of 2 national workshops on this topic, and propose a path toward achieving this goal.The authors envision a future where medical education is shaped by evidence from rigorous research powered by comprehensive, multi-institutional data. To achieve this goal, premedical education, undergraduate medical education, GME, and practicing physician data must be collected using a common data dictionary and standards and longitudinally linked using unique individual identifiers. The envisioned data infrastructure could provide a foundation for evidence-based decisions across all aspects of GME and help optimize the education of individual residents.Two workshops hosted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Board on Health Care Services explored the prospect of better using GME data to improve education and its outcomes. There was broad consensus about the potential value of a longitudinal data infrastructure to improve GME. Significant obstacles were also noted.Suggested next steps outlined by the authors include producing a more complete inventory of data already being collected and managed by key medical education leadership organizations, pursuing a grass-roots data sharing pilot among GME-sponsoring institutions, and formulating the technical and governance frameworks needed to aggregate data across organizations.The power and potential of big data is evident across many disciplines, and the authors believe that harnessing the power of big data in GME is the best next step toward advancing evidence-based physician education.

Considering the Secondary Use of Clinical and Educational Data to Facilitate the Development of Artificial Intelligence Models.

ABSTRACT: Medical training programs and health care systems collect ever-increasing amounts of educational and clinical data. These data are collected with the primary purpose of supporting either trainee learning or patient care. Well-established principles guide the secondary use of these data for program evaluation and quality improvement initiatives. More recently, however, these clinical and educational data are also increasingly being used to train artificial intelligence (AI) models. The implications of this relatively unique secondary use of data have not been well explored. These models can support the development of sophisticated AI products that can be commercialized. While these products have the potential to support and improve the educational system, there are challenges related to validity, patient and learner consent, and biased or discriminatory outputs. The authors consider the implications of developing AI models and products using educational and clinical data from learners, discuss the uses of these products within medical education, and outline considerations that should guide the appropriate use of data for this purpose. These issues are further explored by examining how they have been navigated in an educational collaborative.

Variation in Competence of Graduating General Surgery Trainees.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the readiness of general surgery residents in their final year of training to perform 5 common surgical procedures based on their documented performance during training. DESIGN: Intraoperative performance ratings were analyzed using a Bayesian mixed effects approach, adjusting for rater, trainee, procedure, case complexity, and postgraduate year (PGY) as random effects as well as month in academic year and cumulative, procedure-specific performance per trainee as fixed effects. This model was then used to estimate each PGY 5 trainee's final probability of being able to independently perform each procedure. The actual, documented competency rates for individual trainees were then identified across each of the 5 most common general surgery procedures: appendectomy, cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair, groin hernia repair, and partial colectomy. SETTING: This study was conducted using data from members of the SIMPL collaborative. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 17,248 evaluations of 927 PGY5 general surgery residents were analyzed from 2015 to 2021. RESULTS: The percentage of residents who requested a SIMPL rating during their PGY5 year and achieved a ≥90% probability of being rated as independent, or "Practice-Ready," was 97.4% for appendectomy, 82.4% for cholecystectomy, 43.5% for ventral hernia repair, 24% for groin hernia repair, and 5.3% for partial colectomy. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variation in the demonstrated competency of general surgery residents to perform several common surgical procedures at the end of their training. This variation in readiness calls for careful study of how surgical residents can become more adequately prepared to enter independent practice.