A Comparative American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (ABSITE) Performance Analysis Between International vs. Domestic Graduates and Doctor of Medicine (MD) vs. Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (DO) Medical Degrees.

Introduction The American Board of Surgery (ABS) plays a pivotal role in certifying surgeons in the United States, with the American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (ABSITE) serving as a critical assessment tool for general surgery residents aspiring for certification. The aim of this study is to compare the performance of international medical graduates (IMGs) to their domestic counterparts and assess the impact of different medical degrees on ABSITE scores. Notably, ABSITE scores often dictate the trajectory of a surgical career, including opportunities for fellowship placements in specialized fields such as plastic surgery. Methods This study focused on general surgery residents enrolled at Marshall University from 2014 to 2022. Data encompassing ABSITE scores, TrueLearn quiz percentages, and TrueLearn mock exam results were collected for analysis. Descriptive statistics summarized sample characteristics, and linear mixed models were employed to address correlations. Statistical analyses were conducted using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) (version 9.4; SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA), with significance defined by a two-sided test with p < 0.05. Results Among the 48 participants, comprising 24 non-international medical graduates (nIMGs) and 24 IMGs, IMGs demonstrated superior performance across various metrics. They exhibited higher quiz percentages (67% vs. 61%; p = 0.0029), mock Exam 1 scores (64% vs. 58%; p = 0.0021), mock Exam 2 scores (66% vs. 58%; p = 0.0015), ABSITE scores (560 vs. 505; p = 0.010), and ABSITE percentages (74% vs. 68%; p = 0.0077) compared to nIMGs. Analysis between Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (DO) and Doctor of Medicine (MD) participants revealed no statistically significant differences in performance metrics, highlighting the comparability of these medical degrees in the context of ABSITE scores and related assessments. Discussion/conclusion This study underscores the superior performance of IMGs over nIMGs in ABSITE examinations, shedding light on the critical role of ABSITE scores in shaping surgical careers. Higher scores correlate with enhanced opportunities for coveted fellowship placements, particularly in specialized fields like plastic surgery. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for resident training and navigating the competitive landscape of surgical sub-specialization. Future research endeavors can delve deeper into the factors influencing ABSITE performance, thereby facilitating the development of targeted interventions to support residents in achieving their career aspirations.

Structured Textbook Review and Individualized Learning Plans Successfully Remediate Underperforming Residents and Improve General Surgery Program Performance on the ABSITE.

Background: We endeavored to create an evidence-based curriculum to improve general surgery resident fund of knowledge. Global and resident-specific interventions were employed to this end. These interventions were monitored via multiple choice question results on a weekly basis and American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (ABSITE) performance. Methods: This study was performed in a prospective manner over a 2-year period. A structured textbook review with testing was implemented for all residents. A focused textbook question-writing assignment and a Surgical Council on Resident Education (SCORE)-based individualized learning plan (ILP) were implemented for residents scoring below the 35th percentile on the ABSITE. Results: Curriculum implementation resulted in a statistically significant reduction in the number of residents scoring below the 35th percentile, from 50% to 30.8% (P = .023). One hundred percent of residents initially scoring below the 35th percentile were successfully remediated over the study period. Average overall program ABSITE percentile scores increased from 38.5% to 51.4% over a 2-year period. Conclusion: Structured textbook review and testing combined with a question-writing assignment and a SCORE-focused ILP successfully remediated residents scoring below the 35th percentile and improved general surgery residency ABSITE performance.

Are Surgical Milestone Assessments Predictive of In-Training Examination Scores?

OBJECTIVES: With the recent utilization of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education developmental milestones as part of resident evaluation, we sought to explore whether milestone-based ratings were associated with American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (ABSITE) scores. METHODS: Mid-year milestone ratings were obtained from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Accreditation Database System for years 2014, 2015, and 2016 for all postgraduate years 1-5 general surgery residents in our program and paired with ABSITE scores (n = 69) from January of the following year. Linear regression was used to assess predictor importance of milestones on both ABSITE percentage correct scores and ABSITE percentile scores. RESULTS: Minimal to small positive correlations were observed between milestones and ABSITE percentile scores (r = 0.09-0.25), while moderately large correlations were observed between milestones and percentage correct scores (r = 0.65-0.76). The Medical Knowledge 1 (MK1) milestone significantly predicted ABSITE percentage correct scores, and explained 60% of the variance (adjusted R2 = 0.603). MK1 also significantly predicted ABSITE percentile scores, although weaker in magnitude, with MK1 explaining 20% of the variance (adjusted R2 = 0.197). Postgraduate year level and other milestones were not influential predictors of ABSITE scores. CONCLUSIONS: The mid-year MK1 milestone rating was predictive of ABSITE scores and may serve as a useful marker for Clinical Competency Committees to identify residents who could benefit from additional support to prepare for the ABSITE, although given the small exploratory nature of this study, additional research is still needed.

Effects of Technological Advances in Surgical Education on Quantitative Outcomes From Residency Programs.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this article is to review the literature on current technology for surgical education and to evaluate the effect of technological advances on the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Core Competencies, American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (ABSITE) scores, and American Board of Surgery (ABS) certification. DESIGN: A literature search was obtained from MEDLINE via PubMed.gov, ScienceDirect.com, and Google Scholar on all peer-reviewed studies published since 2003 using the following search queries: technology for surgical education, simulation-based surgical training, simulation-based nontechnical skills (NTS) training, ACGME Core Competencies, ABSITE scores, and ABS pass rate. RESULTS: Our initial search list included the following: 648 on technology for surgical education, 413 on simulation-based surgical training, 51 on simulation-based NTS training, 78 on ABSITE scores, and 33 on ABS pass rate. Further, 42 articles on technological advances for surgical education met inclusion criteria based on their effect on ACGME Core Competencies, ABSITE scores, and ABS certification. Systematic review showed that 33 of 42 and 26 of 42 publications on technological advances for surgical education showed objective improvements regarding patient care and medical knowledge, respectively, whereas only 2 of 42 publications showed improved ABSITE scores, but none showed improved ABS pass rates. Improvements in the other ACGME core competencies were documented in 14 studies, 9 of which were on simulation-based NTS training. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the studies on technological advances for surgical education have shown a positive effect on patient care and medical knowledge. However, the effect of simulation-based surgical training and simulation-based NTS training on ABSITE scores and ABS certification has not been assessed. Studies on technological advances in surgical education and simulation-based NTS training showing quantitative evidence that surgery residency program objectives are achieved are still needed.

Effect of Process Changes in Surgical Training on Quantitative Outcomes From Surgery Residency Programs.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this article is to review the literature on process changes in surgical training programs and to evaluate their effect on the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Core Competencies, American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (ABSITE) scores, and American Board of Surgery (ABS) certification. DESIGN: A literature search was obtained from MEDLINE via PubMed.gov, ScienceDirect.com, Google Scholar on all peer-reviewed studies published since 2003 using the following search queries: surgery residency training, surgical education, competency-based surgical education, ACGME core competencies, ABSITE scores, and ABS pass rate. RESULTS: Our initial search list included 990 articles on surgery residency training models, 539 on competency-based surgical education, 78 on ABSITE scores, and 33 on ABS pass rate. Overall, 31 articles met inclusion criteria based on their effect on ACGME Core Competencies, ABSITE scores, and ABS certification. Systematic review showed that 5/31, 19/31, and 6/31 articles on process changes in surgical training programs had a positive effect on patient care, medical knowledge, and ABSITE scores, respectively. ABS certification was not analyzed. The other ACGME core competencies were addressed in only 6 studies. CONCLUSIONS: Several publications on process changes in surgical training programs have shown a positive effect on patient care, medical knowledge, and ABSITE scores. However, the effect on ABS certification, and other quantitative outcomes from residency programs, have not been addressed. Studies on education strategies showing evidence that residency program objectives are being achieved are still needed. This article addresses the 6 ACGME Core Competencies.