Using the Flipped Classroom Model in Surgical Education: Efficacy and Trainee Perception.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the feasibility, efficacy, and learner perception of the flipped classroom model for teaching conferences within surgical training programs. DESIGN: For the flipped classroom conferences, video lectures were prepared by a faculty member, and sent to all attendees at least 2 days prior to lecture. The conference time was then spent going over cases and questions, rather than traditional lecture. We conducted a qualitative survey to assess learner's perceptions and pre-lecture quizzes to assess trainee preparedness. SETTING: The comparison of pre-conference quizzes between flipped classroom and traditional models was carried out at Brooke Army Medical Center (BAMC) in San Antonio, TX, a tertiary care facility with a general surgery residency program. The survey was conducted at BAMC and within the Complex General Surgical Oncology fellowship program at University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, where a flipped classroom model was similarly employed. PARTICIPANTS: Surgical residents BAMC participated in pre-lecture quizzes. BAMC residents and MD Anderson fellows were invited to complete the online survey. RESULTS: Lecture videos did not increase mean preparation time (1.53 vs. 1.46 hours without vs. with video, p = 0.858), but did increase mean quiz scores from 67% to 80% (p = 0.031) with 32/35 learners utilizing videos. Videos increased the proportion of learners who self-reported preparing at all from 42% to 95% (p = 0.28), and preparing for at least one hour for conference from 23% to 49% (p = 0.014). Of survey respondents, 90% said videos were very helpful, 90% would use them weekly if available, and 90% prefer this format to traditional lecture. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of a flipped classroom method was well received and preferred by surgical trainees, and it increased performance on pre-conference quizzes without increasing preparation time. Although creation of video lectures is work-intensive for lecturers, these results suggest it is more effective for learner preparation. These results could be generalizable to surgical residents nationwide as technology utilization increases in surgical education.

Comparison of oncological outcomes after open and laparoscopic re-resection of incidental gallbladder cancer.

BACKGROUND: The safety and oncological efficacy of laparoscopic re-resection of incidental gallbladder cancer have not been studied. This study aimed to compare laparoscopic with open re-resection of incidentally discovered gallbladder cancer while minimizing selection bias. METHODS: This was a multicentre retrospective observational cohort study of patients with incidental gallbladder cancer who underwent re-resection with curative intent at four centres between 2000 and 2017. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were analysed by intention to treat. Inverse probability of surgery treatment weighting using propensity scoring was undertaken. RESULTS: A total of 255 patients underwent re-resection (190 open, 65 laparoscopic). Nineteen laparoscopic procedures were converted to open operation. Surgery before 2011 was the only factor associated with conversion. Duration of hospital stay was shorter after laparoscopic re-resection (median 4 versus 6 days; P < 0·001). Three-year OS rates for laparoscopic and open re-resection were 87 and 62 per cent respectively (P = 0·502). Independent predictors of worse OS were residual cancer found at re-resection (hazard ratio (HR) 1·91, 95 per cent c.i. 1·17 to 3·11), blood loss of at least 500 ml (HR 1·83, 1·23 to 2·74) and at least four positive nodes (HR 3·11, 1·46 to 6·65). In competing-risks analysis, the RFS incidence was higher for laparoscopic re-resection (P = 0·038), but OS did not differ between groups. Independent predictors of worse RFS were one to three positive nodes (HR 2·16, 1·29 to 3·60), at least four positive nodes (HR 4·39, 1·96 to 9·82) and residual cancer (HR 2·42, 1·46 to 4·00). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic re-resection for selected patients with incidental gallbladder cancer is oncologically non-inferior to an open approach. Dissemination of advanced laparoscopic skills and timely referral of patients with incidental gallbladder cancer to specialized centres may allow more patients to benefit from this operation.

ANTECEDENTES: No se conoce la seguridad y la eficacia oncológica de la re-resección laparoscópica del cáncer incidental de vesícula biliar. Este estudio tiene como objetivo comparar las re-resecciones del cáncer incidental de vesícula biliar por vía laparoscópica y vía abierta, minimizando el sesgo de selección. MÉTODOS: Estudio de cohortes observacional, retrospectivo y multicéntrico de pacientes con cáncer incidental de vesícula biliar que se sometieron a una re-resección con intención curativa en 4 centros entre 2000 y 2017. Se analizó la supervivencia global (overall survival, OS) y la supervivencia libre de recidiva (recurrence free survival, RFS) según intención de tratamiento. Se calculó la probabilidad inversa de la ponderación del tratamiento quirúrgico utilizando puntuación de propensión. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 255 pacientes con re-resección (190 por vía abierta y 65 por vía laparoscópica). Se convirtieron 19 pacientes del grupo laparoscópico. El único factor relacionado con la conversión fue la realización de la cirugía antes de año 2011. La mediana de la estancia hospitalaria fue más corta tras la re-resección laparoscópica (4 versus 6 días; P < 0,001). La OS a tres años fue del 87% y del 62% (P = 0,502) para las re-resecciones laparoscópicas y abiertas, respectivamente). Los factores predictivos independientes relacionados con una peor OS fueron el hallazgo de cáncer residual en el momento de la re-resección (cociente de riesgos instantáneos, hazard ratio, HR 1,91; i.c. del 95% 1,17-3,11), una pérdida hemática > 500 ml (HR 1,83; i.c. del 95% 1,23-2,74) y la presencia de ≥ 4 ganglios positivos (HR 3,11; i.c. del 95% 1,46-6,65). En el análisis de riesgo competitivo, la RFS fue mayor para la resección laparoscópica (P = 0,038), pero no hubo diferencias en la OS entre ambos grupos. Los factores predictivos independientes de peor RFS fueron la detección de 1-3 ganglios positivos (HR 2,16; i.c. del 95% 1,29-3,60), ≥ 4 ganglio positivos (HR 4,39; i.c. del 95% 1,96-9,82) y el cáncer residual (HR 2,42; i.c. de 95% 1,46-4,0). CONCLUSIÓN: En pacientes seleccionados, los resultados oncológicos de la re-resección laparoscópica de un cáncer incidental de vesícula biliar no son inferiores a los que se obtienen por vía abierta. Una mayor difusión de las técnicas laparoscópicas avanzadas y una oportuna derivación de los pacientes con cáncer de vesícula biliar incidental a centros especializados podrían permitir que un mayor número de pacientes se beneficiaran de este abordaje.