Non-inferiority Study Design: Application to Clinical Trials.

SUMMARY: Non-inferiority trials, a distinct category within randomized controlled trials, are garnering increased attention in medical research. Their unique and evolving role comes to the forefront in scenarios where new treatments, despite not surpassing the efficacy of an existing standard, bring additional benefits like reduced side effects, enhanced compliance, or cost savings. As the field of surgery witnesses a growing number of published non-inferiority trials, it becomes imperative for surgeons to grasp the intricacies of this trial type to accurately decipher and interpret their outcomes.

Utilization Trends of Nerve Autograft Alternatives for the Reconstruction of Peripheral Nerve Defects.

BACKGROUND: Autologous nerve grafting is the time-honored reconstruction method for peripheral nerve gaps. However, it is associated with donor-site morbidities. A growing number of studies have demonstrated the effective use of decellularized nerve allograft and synthetic conduits, which are convenient options with no donor deficit. The specific aim of this study was to characterize changes in practice trends for peripheral nerve defect reconstruction. METHODS: The authors queried the 2015 to 2020 Merative MarketScan Databases for patients who underwent nerve autograft, allograft, synthetic conduit, and/or vein graft reconstruction. Patient demographic data (ie, location, indication) and hospital characteristics (ie, facility, provider type) were recorded. Regression analysis identified changes in trends over the study period. RESULTS: A total of 4331 patients underwent one or more nerve gap reconstructive procedures over the study period. Since the introduction of allograft CPT code in 2018, segmented mixed effect longitudinal modeling revealed that allograft utilization significantly increased from 21.5% to 29.6% after 2018 ( P < 0.001), whereas nerve autograft use decreased from 18.6% to 15.8% and conduit use decreased from 60% to 54.7% ( P = 0.09 and P = 0.03, respectively). When stratifying autograft by size, use of autograft less than or equal to 4 cm significantly decreased from 10.6% to 7.7% after 2018 ( P = 0.03), and autograft greater than 4 cm did not. When stratifying by state, there is heterogeneity in utilization rates of each product. CONCLUSION: After creation of a designated allograft CPT code in 2018, there was an increase in allograft use with concomitant decrease in conduit and short length autograft use, suggesting that allograft replaced a portion of procedures used in short nerve gap reconstruction.

Predictors and Variation in Steroid Injection Use for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome from a Multicenter Quality Collaborative.

BACKGROUND: Steroid injections are commonly used as first-line treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS); however, research has shown that their benefit is generally short-term and many patients go on to receive carpal tunnel release. The study purpose was to determine the variation in steroid injection use by hand surgeons. METHODS: We analyzed data from a 9-center hand surgery quality collaborative. Data from 1,586 patients (2,381 hands) were included if they underwent elective CTR at one of the sites. Mixed effects logistic regression models were used to examine the association of receipt of steroid injection and association of receipt of more than one steroid injection among patient-level covariates. RESULTS: Steroid injection use significantly varied by practice, ranging from 12-53% of patients. The odds of receiving a steroid injection were 1.4 times higher for females (p<0.01), 1.6 times higher for patients with chronic pain syndrome (p<0.01), 0.5 times lower for patients with moderate electromyography (EMG) and 0.4 times lower for patients with severe EMG classification (both p<0.01). Patients with high CTS-6 scores (p=0.02) and patients with moderate (p=0.04) or severe EMG (p=0.05) had lower odds of receiving multiple steroid injections. Complete symptomatic improvement after steroid injection was significantly reported by patients with high CTS-6 score (p=0.03) or patients with severe EMG classification (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: We found wide patient-level and practice-level variation in the use of steroid injections prior to undergoing CTR. These findings underscore the need for improved data and standard practice guidelines regarding which patients benefit from steroid injection.

A Quality Collaborative Study of the Concordance of Electrodiagnostic Scores and Clinical Severity in Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Electrodiagnostic studies are commonly used to diagnose carpal tunnel syndrome. However, these examinations are prone to false-positive and false-negative values. The authors evaluated the agreement of electrodiagnostic study severity, clinical assessment scores, and probability of carpal tunnel syndrome [Six-Item Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Evaluation Tool (CTS-6) scores. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 609 patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (941 hands). Data were collected from nine hand surgery practices in the Michigan Collaborative Hand Initiative for Quality in Surgery. Goodman and Kruskal gamma statistics (γ) measured the agreement between electrodiagnostic studies and clinical assessment scores and between electrodiagnostic studies and CTS-6 scores. The authors performed cumulative logistic regression with mixed effects to evaluate the association among electrodiagnostic study severity, clinical assessments, and patient characteristics. RESULTS: The concordance between electrodiagnostic study severity and CTS-6 scores was γ = 0.31 (95 percent CI, 0.21 to 0.40), with an accuracy of 43 percent. The concordance between electrodiagnostic study severity and clinical assessment scores was γ = 0.66 (95 percent CI, 0.58 to 0.74), with an accuracy of 58 percent. Wide site-level variation in the γ coefficient between electrodiagnostic studies and clinical assessment scores and between electrodiagnostic studies and CTS-6 was seen. Male sex, increasing age, and increasing body mass index were significantly associated with increased odds of electrodiagnostic study severity. CONCLUSIONS: Wide practice-level variation underscores the variability in diagnostic testing accuracy. Physicians should consider patient characteristics (e.g., sex, age, body mass index) when assessing carpal tunnel syndrome severity. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic, II.

Task-Specific Patient Preferences for Shared Decision-Making in Hand Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making for surgery can increase patient engagement, satisfaction, and clinical outcomes. However, the level of involvement that patients desire at each step of the decision-making process is unknown. METHODS: The authors surveyed patients at an academic hand surgery clinic to examine the preferred role in decision-making using validated questionnaires (i.e., Control Preference Scale, Problem-Solving Decision-Making Scale, and General Self-Efficacy Scale). The Control Preference Scale assesses general treatment preferences, whereas the Problem-Solving Decision-Making Scale distinguishes between problem-solving tasks (e.g., making diagnoses, calculating risks/benefits) and decision-making tasks. Patients' self-beliefs and perceived ability to handle difficult situations were assessed with the General Self-Efficacy Scale. The authors used linear regression models and ordinal logistic regression to examine the relationship between self-efficacy and patients' preferred role in treatment decision-making. RESULTS: Patients overall preferred an equal share of decision-making responsibility with the surgeon (mean Control Preference Scale score, 3.3 ± 0.7). Specifically, for problem-solving tasks, however, 81 percent of patients wanted to "hand over" the responsibility and 19 percent preferred shared decision-making. In contrast, for decision-making tasks, 54 percent of patients preferred shared decision-making. Each point increase in General Self-Efficacy Scale score correlated with 12 percent greater odds of preferring to retain the responsibility (OR, 1.12; 95 percent CI, 1.05 to 1.21; p = 0.001). However, self-efficacy did not show a significant effect for problem-solving tasks. CONCLUSIONS: The authors found that patients prefer surgeons to provide expert knowledge for problem-solving tasks but desire equal share of responsibility in decision-making tasks. The authors' findings support the current shift away from the paternalistic model of surgical decision-making, and provide an effective strategy to tailor shared decision-making to align care delivery with patient preferences.

Opioid Prescribing after Carpal Tunnel Release: Analysis from the Michigan Collaborative Hand Initiative for Quality in Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding the national practice patterns for postoperative opioid prescribing after carpal tunnel release, which is one of the most common surgical procedures performed. The authors sought to assess the rate of opioid prescribing after carpal tunnel release and patient-, surgeon-, and practice-level predictors of opioid prescriptions after surgery. METHODS: The authors conducted a cohort study from the Michigan Collaborative Hand Initiative for Quality in Surgery, a national consortium of nine practices with 33 surgeons who prospectively collect data for the purpose of quality improvement. Patients were included who underwent carpal tunnel release between July 1, 2019, and December 31, 2019. Multilevel logistic regression was used to determine practice and surgeon variation in postoperative opioid prescribing related to patient characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 648 patients with 792 operative hands, 52.9 percent were prescribed a postoperative opioid. After controlling for patient, surgeon, and practice characteristics, endoscopic carpal tunnel releases were associated with a decreased odds of receiving a postoperative opioid prescription compared to open carpal tunnel releases (OR, 0.19; 95 percent CI, 0.07 to 0.52). However, 57.4 percent of the variation in opioid prescribing was explained at the practice level, and 4.1 percent of the variation was explained at the surgeon level. CONCLUSIONS: Practice-level prescribing patterns play a substantial role in opioid prescribing. National efforts should consider development of evidence-based opioid prescribing recommendations for carpal tunnel release that target all prescribers, including trainees and advanced practice providers. In addition, endoscopic carpal tunnel release may offer an opportunity to minimize opioid prescribing. The authors recommend that providers encourage the use of nonopioid analgesia and limit opioid prescriptions after carpal tunnel release. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

Variation in Use of Electrodiagnostic Testing: Analysis From the Michigan Collaborative Hand Initiative for Quality in Surgery.

PURPOSE: To evaluate factors that predict the use of electrodiagnostic testing (EDS) for patients undergoing carpal tunnel release (CTR). METHODS: In this cohort study, we analyzed 553 patients who underwent primary CTR from 8 practices between July 1, 2019 and December 1, 2019 by 32 surgeons in the Michigan Collaborative Hand Initiative for Quality in Surgery (M-CHIQS). The M-CHIQS is a collaborative initiative aimed at improving quality in hand surgery. Demographic and clinical characteristics were collected, including the 6-item carpal tunnel symptoms scale (CTS-6) scores and EDS timing. Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess practice and surgeon variation in EDS use related to clinical diagnostic criteria. RESULTS: Of the 553 patients who underwent CTR during the study period, 461 (83.3%) received preoperative EDS. After controlling for patient clinical and demographic characteristics, CTS-6 scores were not associated with receiving any preoperative EDS (lower probability of CTS: odds ratio [OR], 0.94; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.59-1.51), preconsultation EDS (low probability of CTS: OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.73-1.38), or postconsultation EDS (low probability of CTS, OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.77-1.60). For use of any EDS, 9.3% of the variation in testing was explained at the practice level and 31.1% of the variation in testing was explained at the surgeon level. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in EDS use is explained primarily at the practice and surgeon levels and is not related to patient clinical criteria. We recommend that providers and practices assess their use of preoperative EDS and limit its use to patients with an unclear clinical CTS diagnosis, as stated in current clinical practice guidelines. Likewise, providers should be encouraged to use the CTS-6 before prescribing EDS. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Limiting the use of EDS to patients with an unclear clinical diagnosis of CTS will reduce costs and improve patient care by eliminating the discomfort and time associated with this test.

A Nationwide Study Assessing Preventable Hospitalization Rate on Mortality After Major Cardiovascular Surgery.

Despite the use of various factors to measure hospital quality, most measures have not resulted in long-term improvements in patient outcomes. This study's purpose is to determine the effect of a previously unassessed measure of quality of care-a hospital's preventable hospitalization rate-on 30-day mortality at both the hospital and individual levels after three major cardiovascular surgery procedures. This is a population-based study using Taiwan's National Health Insurance database. We retrieved data from 2001 to 2014 for patients who had undergone abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair, coronary artery bypass graft, or aortic valve replacement (AVR). Preventable hospitalizations are hospitalizations for 11 chronic conditions that are considered preventable with effective primary care. The outcome was 30-day surgical mortality. Our dataset contained 65,863 patients who had undergone surgery for one of the three cardiovascular procedures. Preventable hospitalization rate was significantly associated with higher hospital mortality rates for all procedures. At the patient level, the adjusted odds of mortality after AAA repair were increased 55% (P < 0.01) for every 2% increase in the preventable hospitalization rate. For coronary artery bypass graft, preventable hospitalization was not a significant predictor of mortality, but rather patient factors and surgeon factors were significant. For AVR, the adjusted odds of mortality were increased 7% (P < 0.01) for every 1% increase in preventable hospitalization rate. High preventable hospitalization rate may serve as a hospital quality measure that could signal increased odds of mortality for selected cardiovascular procedures, especially for higher risk-lower volume procedures such as AAA repair and AVR.

A Nationwide Population-based Study From Taiwan Assessing the Influence of Preventable Hospitalization Rate on Mortality After Oncologic Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a previously unassessed measure of quality-preventable hospitalization rate-on mortality after oncologic surgery for 4 procedures with established volume-outcome relationships. We hypothesize that hospitals with higher preventable hospitalization rates (indicating poor quality of primary care) have increased hospital mortality. Additionally, patients having surgery at hospitals with higher preventable hospitalization rates have increased mortality. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Although different factors have been used to measure healthcare quality, most have not resulted in long-term hospital-based improvements in patient outcomes. METHODS: We retrieved data from Taiwan's National Health Insurance database for patients who underwent surgery during 2001 to 2014 for esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, lung resection, or cystectomy. Preventable hospitalization rates assess hospitalizations for 11 chronic conditions that are deemed to be preventable with effective primary care. The outcome was 30-day surgical mortality. Identifiable factors potentially related to surgical mortality, including surgeon and hospital volume, were controlled for in the models. RESULTS: Our dataset contained 35,081 patients who had surgery for one of the procedures. For all procedures, hospitals with high preventable hospitalization rates were associated with higher mortality rates (all P < 0.01). For esophagectomy, lung resection, and cystectomy, the adjusted odds of individual mortality increased by 8% to 10% (P < 0.01) for every 1% increase in the preventable hospitalization rate. For pancreatectomy, the adjusted odds of individual mortality increased by 21% for every 1% increase in preventable hospitalization rate when the rate was ≥8% (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Preventable hospitalization rates could serve as warning signs of low quality of care and be a publically-reported quality measure.

The Next Frontier of Outcomes Research: Collaborative Quality Initiatives.

Quality improvement efforts at the federal level have instituted both rewards and penalties as incentives to improve health care quality. However, neither of these methods has shown long-lasting improvements. Furthermore, many programs have focused on decreasing mortality or hospital readmissions, measurements that are not applicable to many surgical fields, including plastic surgery. One model that has been shown to be effective is a collaborative quality initiative that uses a pay-for-participation method whereby participants learn from one another and institute changes to improve patient care. Many of these changes are process measures that are easier to implement and quicker to show improvement than structural or outcome measures. Regional collaborative quality initiatives have been developed in other surgical specialties such as bariatric surgery and urology. Currently, the authors are establishing a new collaborative quality initiative for hand surgery: the Michigan Collaborative Hand Initiative for Quality in Surgery. It is a collaboration of nine sites with the goal of identifying areas that are in need of quality improvement in hand surgery and implementing measures to improve on them. The authors believe that collaborative quality initiatives will promote high-quality care and should be incorporated into the field of plastic surgery.

Quality Measures in Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: Identifying Metrics to Improve Care.

BACKGROUND: Specific measures tailored to the properties of individual procedures will ensure the appropriate evaluation of quality. Because postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) is becoming increasingly common, a review of the literature is timely to identify potential breast reconstruction-specific measures that can be applied by institutions and national healthcare organizations to improve quality. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase for studies examining the quality of care for patients undergoing PMBR. Data extracted from the articles include basic study characteristics, the number of quality metrics, type of quality metric (defined by Donabedian model), and the domain of quality (defined by the National Academy of Medicine). RESULTS: A total of 2,158 articles were identified in the initial search, and 440 studies were included for data extraction. The most common type of quality measure was outcome measures (91%), and the least common measure was structure measures (1%). The most common metrics were operative time (41%), hospital type (28%), and aspects of the patient-provider interactions (20%). Additionally, we found that timeliness and equity were least common among the 6 National Academy of Medicine domains. CONCLUSIONS: We identified metrics utilized in the PMBR, some of which can be further investigated through high-level evidence studies and incorporated into policy. Because many factors influence surgical outcomes and breast reconstruction is driven by patient preferences, an inclusion of structure, process, and outcome metrics will help improve care for this patient population. Moreover, nonpunitive initiatives, specifically quality collaboratives, may provide an avenue to improve care quality without compromising patient safety.

Finger Replantation Optimization Study (FRONT): Update on National Trends.

PURPOSE: Traumatic digit amputations have an adverse impact on patients' daily living. Despite experts advocating for digit replantation, studies have shown a continued decrease in rate of replantation. We performed a national-level investigation to examine the recent trend of practice for digital replantation. METHODS: We used the National Inpatient Sample database under the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project to select adult patients with traumatic digit amputation from 2001 to 2014. We calculated the rate of attempted and rate of successful digit replantation per year, subcategorizing for digit type (thumb or finger) and for hospital type (rural, urban nonteaching, or urban teaching). We also analyzed the pattern of distribution of case volume to each hospital type per year. We used 2 multivariable logistic regression models to investigate patient demographic and hospital characteristics associated with the odds of replantation attempt and success. RESULTS: Among the 14,872 adult patients with a single digit amputation from 2001 to 2014, only 1,670 (11.2%) underwent replantation. The rate of replantation attempt trended down over the years for both thumb and finger injuries at all hospital types, despite increasing proportions of cases being sent to urban teaching hospitals where they were more than twice as likely to undergo replantation. The rate of successful replantation stayed stable for the thumb at 82.9% and increased for fingers from 76.1% to 82.4% over the years. Patients were more likely to undergo replantation if they had private insurance or a higher level of income. Neither hospital case volume nor hospital type was predictive of successful replantation. CONCLUSIONS: Although more single-digit amputations were treated by urban teaching hospitals with higher likelihood to replant, the downward trend in rate of attempt regardless of hospital type demonstrates that concentration of case volume is not the solution to reverse the declining trend. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Financial aspects of digit replantation need to be considered from both the patients' and the surgeons' perspectives to improve delivery of care for digit replantation.

A 16-Year Journey in the Study of Rheumatoid Hand Disease.

Evidence-based medicine is a relatively new concept in hand surgery. A lack of high-level evidence often leads to uncertainty in the effectiveness of various procedures and regional variation in their use. Rheumatoid hand surgery has been plagued by a lack of quality data that has caused controversy between rheumatologists and hand surgeons. Research over the past 16 years has strived to provide data that can be used to provide evidence-based care for rheumatoid arthritis patients. The Silicone Arthroplasty in Rheumatoid Arthritis study is a prospective, long-term cohort study of rheumatoid arthritis patients with severe metacarpophalangeal joint deformity who have elected to undergo or not to undergo metacarpophalangeal joint arthroplasty; the study was funded for 10 years by the National Institutes of Health and has provided invaluable results on the effectiveness of this procedure in terms of outcomes and cost, improving knowledge for both physicians and patients.

Seven-Year Outcomes of the Silicone Arthroplasty in Rheumatoid Arthritis Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) causes destruction of the metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints, leading to hand deformities, pain, and loss of function. This study prospectively assessed long-term functional and health-related quality-of-life outcomes in RA patients with severe deformity at the MCP joints. METHODS: RA patients between ages 18 to 80 years with severe deformity at the MCP joints were referred to 1 of the 3 study sites. Subjects who elected to undergo silicone metacarpophalangeal joint arthroplasty (SMPA) while continuing with medical management were followed in the SMPA cohort. Subjects who elected to continue with medical management alone without surgery were followed in the non-SMPA cohort. Objective measurements included grip and pinch strength as well as arc of motion, ulnar drift, and extensor lag of the MCP joints. Patient-reported outcomes included the Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ) and the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales questionnaire. Radiographs of SMPA implants were assessed and graded as intact, deformed, or fractured. RESULTS: MHQ scores showed large improvements post-SMPA, and baseline-adjusted expected outcomes in the SMPA group were significantly better at year 7 in function, aesthetics, satisfaction, and overall score compared to non-SMPA. SMPA subjects did not improve in grip or pinch strength, but achieved significant improvement and maintained the improvement long term in ulnar drift and extensor lag. CONCLUSION: Benefits of the SMPA procedure are maintained over 7 years with low rates of implant fracture or deformity. Non-SMPA patients remained stable in their hand function over the 7-year study duration.

A Review of the Use of Medicare Claims Data in Plastic Surgery Outcomes Research.

With a growing national emphasis in data transparency and reporting of public health data, it is essential for researchers to know more about Medicare claims data, the largest and most reliable source of health-care utilization and expenditure for individuals older than 65 years in the United States. This article provides an overview of Medicare claims data for plastic surgery outcomes research. We highlight essential information on various files included in Medicare claims data, strengths and limitations of the data, and ways to expand the use of existing data for research purposes. As of now, Medicare data are limited in providing adequate information regarding severity of diagnosed conditions, health status of individuals, and health outcomes after certain procedures. However, the data contain all health-care utilization and expenditures for services that are covered by Medicare Parts A, B, and D (inpatient, outpatient, ambulatory-based and physician-based services, and prescription drugs). Additionally, Medicare claims data can be used for longitudinal analysis of variations in utilization and cost of health-care services at the patient level and provider level. Linking Medicare claims data with other national databases and utilizing the ICD-10 coding system would further expand the use of these datasets in health services research.

Manuscript rejection: how to submit a revision and tips on being a good peer reviewer.

Many instructional guides have been published on how to write scientific papers. Likewise, many published articles have focused on the reasons why submitted manuscripts are rejected. However, fewer publications have been presented to guide authors on how to address reviewers' comments in a manuscript revision. Even fewer counsel authors on how to deal with a rejection decision. In this article, the authors present a literature review on the strategies to get a manuscript accepted, despite an initial unfavorable review. The authors share their experience with addressing reviewers' comments to get a manuscript accepted and published. Finally, the authors discuss the process of peer review and offer tips on how to be an effective peer reviewer.

Institutional review boards: what's old? What's new? What needs to change?

SUMMARY: Institutional review boards have come under fire for being burdened with work, causing delays in the progress of human subject research without improvements in the protection of human subjects. Over the years, there have been increases in the numbers of clinical trials, the use of multisite studies, and the amount of bureaucracy, but there have been no changes to the system to accommodate these advancements. Proposed changes include the use of a centralized institutional review board for multisite studies and harmonization of reporting requirements among agencies. The purposes of this article are to review the history, structure, and purpose of the institutional review board, to assess the criticisms of the current system, and to discuss solutions for improvement.

Applying the concepts of innovation strategies to plastic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Plastic surgery has a well-known history of innovative procedures and products. However, with the rise in competition, such as aesthetic procedures being performed by other medical specialties, there is a need for continued innovation in plastic surgery to create novel treatments to advance this specialty. Although many articles introduce innovative technologies and procedures, there is a paucity of publications to highlight the application of principles of innovation in plastic surgery. METHODS: The authors review the literature regarding business strategies for innovation. RESULTS: The authors evaluate concepts of innovation, process of innovation (i.e., idea generation, idea evaluation, idea conversion, idea diffusion, and adoption), ethical issues, and application to plastic surgery. CONCLUSION: Adopting a business model of innovation is helpful for promoting a new paradigm of progress to propel plastic surgery to new avenues of creativity.

Application of the "see one, do one, teach one" concept in surgical training.

BACKGROUND: The traditional method of teaching in surgery is known as "see one, do one, teach one." However, many have argued that this method is no longer applicable, mainly because of concerns for patient safety. The purpose of this article is to show that the basis of the traditional teaching method is still valid in surgical training if it is combined with various adult learning principles. METHODS: The authors reviewed literature regarding the history of the formation of the surgical residency program, adult learning principles, mentoring, and medical simulation. The authors provide examples for how these learning techniques can be incorporated into a surgical resident training program. RESULTS: The surgical residency program created by Dr. William Halsted remained virtually unchanged until recently with reductions in resident work hours and changes to a competency-based training system. Such changes have reduced the teaching time between attending physicians and residents. Learning principles such as experience, observation, thinking, and action and deliberate practice can be used to train residents. Mentoring is also an important aspect in teaching surgical technique. The authors review the different types of simulators-standardized patients, virtual reality applications, and high-fidelity mannequin simulators-and the advantages and disadvantages of using them. CONCLUSIONS: The traditional teaching method of "see one, do one, teach one" in surgical residency programs is simple but still applicable. It needs to evolve with current changes in the medical system to adequately train surgical residents and also provide patients with safe, evidence-based care.