Roadmap for Research and Scholarship in General Surgery Residency Training: Report of The Research Subcommittee of Blue Ribbon Committee II on Surgical Education and Training.

OBJECTIVE: To review the current state of research training during surgical residency and make recommendations commensurate with current surgical training and academic environment. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Research training has been a mainstay of academic surgical programs, yet the scientific disciplines have evolved significantly from the traditional years of bench research. It is time to reconsider how research training should prepare surgeons for future academic practice and ensure the foundational knowledge of research evidence. METHODS: As part of the Blue Ribbon Committee II, a research subcommittee was tasked to make recommendations on research training during surgical residency. Our eight-member panel brought diverse perspectives of the roles and goals of research training. We also sought input from a convenience sample of current and recent surgical residents on impact of research training during their residency. RESULTS: We identified a lack of a common framework and foundational research training for all surgical residents. Participation in dedicated years of scholarly activity helped trainees meet several professional and personal goals. The lack of an integrated, dedicated research track may dissuade some medical school graduates from pursuing surgery. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend incorporating a minimum standard for all trainees and flexibility in dedicated scholarly training to meet the needs of future academic surgeons.

Peer Support to Promote Surgeon Well-being: The APSA Program Experience.

BACKGROUND: Peer support programs have evolved to train physicians to provide outreach and emotional first aid to their colleagues when they experience the inevitable challenge of a serious adverse event, whether or not it is related to a medical error. Most pediatric surgeons have experienced the trauma of a medical error, yet, in a survey of APSA membership, almost half said that no one reached out to them, and few were satisfied with their institution's response to the error. Thus, the APSA Wellness Committee developed an APSA-based peer support program to meet this need. METHODS: Peer supporters were nominated by fellow APSA members, and the group was vetted to ensure diversity in demographics, practice setting, and seniority. Formal virtual training was conducted before the program went live in 2020. Trained supporters were surveyed 6 months after the program launched to evaluate their experiences with providing peer support. RESULTS: 15 referrals were made in the first year, 60 % of which were self-initiated. Most referrals were for distress related to adverse events or toxic work environments (33 % each). While only about 25 % of trained supporters had provided formal support through the APSA program, more than 80 % reported using the skills to support colleagues and trainees within their own institutions. CONCLUSION: Our experience in the first year of the APSA peer support program demonstrates the feasibility of building and maintaining a national program to provide emotional first aid by a professional society to expand the safety net for surgeons who are suffering.