Blue Ribbon Committee I Review: Findings and Impact.

OBJECTIVE: Review the subsequent impact of recommendations made by the 2004 American Surgical Association Blue Ribbon Committee (BRC I) Report on Surgical Education. BACKGROUND: Current leaders of the American College of Surgeons and the American Surgical Association convened an expert panel to review the impact of the BRC I report and make recommendations for future improvements in surgical education. METHODS: BRC I members reviewed the 2004 recommendations in light of the current status of surgical education. RESULTS: Some of the recommendations of BRC I have gained traction and have been implemented. There is a well-organized national curriculum and numerous educational offerings. There has been greater emphasis on preparing faculty to teach and there are ample opportunities for professional advancement as an educator. The number of residents has grown, although not at a pace to meet the country's needs either by total number or geographic distribution. The number of women in the profession has increased. There is greater awareness and attention to resident (and faculty) well-being. The anticipated radical change in the educational scheme has not been adopted. Training in surgical research still depends on the resources and interests of individual programs. Financing student and graduate medical education remains a challenge. CONCLUSIONS: The medical landscape has changed considerably since BRC I published its findings in 2005. A contemporary assessment of surgical education and training is needed to meet the future needs of the profession and our patients.

A Scoping Review of the Literature on Entrustable Professional Activities in Surgery Residency Programs.

OBJECTIVE: Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are a crucial component of contemporary postgraduate medical education with many surgery residency programs having implemented EPAs as a competency assessment framework to assess and provide feedback on the performance of their residents. Despite broad implementation of EPAs, there is a paucity of evidence regarding the impact of EPAs on the learners and learning environments. A first step in improving understanding of the use and impact of EPAs is by mapping the rising number of EPA-related publications from the field of surgery. The primary objective of this scoping review is to examine the nature, extent, and range of articles on the development, implementation, and assessment of EPAs. The second objective is to identify the experiences and factors that influence EPA implementation and use in practice in surgical specialties. DESIGN: Scoping review. Four electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Education Source, and ERIC) were searched on January 20, 2022, and then again on July 19, 2023. A quasi-statistical content analysis was employed to quantify and draw meaning from the information related to the development, implementation, assessment, validity, reliability, and experiences with EPAs in the workplace. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 42 empirical and nonempirical articles were included. RESULTS: Four thematic categories describe the topic areas in included articles related to: 1) the development and refinement of EPAs, including the multiple steps taken to develop and refine unique EPAs for surgery residency programs; 2) the methods for implementing EPAs; 3) outcomes of EPA use in practice; 4) barriers, facilitators, and areas for improvement for the implementation and use of EPAs in surgical education. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review highlights the key trends and gaps from the rapidly increasing number of publications on EPAs in surgery residency, from development to their use in the workplace. Existing EPA studies lack a theoretical and/or conceptual basis; future development and implementation studies should adopt implementation science frameworks to better structure and operationalize EPAs within surgery residency programs.

Piloting a National Curricular Resource for the Transition to Surgical Residency: Characteristics of Participating Schools and Their Students.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent to which U.S. Liaison Committee of Medical Education (LCME)-accredited medical schools chose to participate in piloting a national curricular resource, the American College of Surgeons/Association of Program Directors in Surgery/Association of Surgical Education Resident Prep Curriculum ("ACS-surgery-prep curriculum"), and implications of such participation for student access nationally to this resource. DESIGN: We examined the significance of school-level differences in ACS-surgery-prep curriculum pilot participation and student-level differences in curriculum access based on medical school attended in bivariate analysis. SETTING: U.S. medical schools choosing to participate in the ACS-surgery-prep curriculum through 2021. Students graduating from U.S. LCME-accredited medical schools in 2020-2021 were invited to complete the Association of American Medical Colleges 2021 Graduation Questionnaire (GQ). PARTICIPANTS: Our study included data for 2569 students intending surgery specialties (16% of 16,353 2021 GQ respondents) from ACS-surgery-prep curriculum pilot and non-pilot schools. RESULTS: Of 148 medical schools attended by 2021 GQ respondents, 93 (63%) were identified as ACS-surgery-prep curriculum pilot schools. Pilot participation varied by school region, community-based designation, and research intensity (each p < 0.05) but not by ownership or transition to residency (TTR) course requirements (each p > 0.05). Of 2569 GQ respondents nationally intending surgery specialties, 1697 (66%) attended an ACS-surgery-prep curriculum pilot school; this proportion did not vary by gender or race/ethnicity (each p > 0.05) but varied by students' school TTR course requirements (p < 0.001). Findings were similar among the 1059 students intending general surgery specialties specifically (41% of all 2569 students intending surgery specialties). CONCLUSIONS: Many U.S. LCME-accredited medical schools piloted this national TTR surgery curriculum. School-level characteristics associated with pilot participation can inform outreach efforts to encourage the participation of interested schools in piloting this TTR resource. With this curriculum distribution model, we observed no gender or racial/ethnic disparities in curriculum access nationally among students intending surgery specialties.

A review of the American College of Surgeons accredited education institutes' assessment practices for learners, faculty, and continuous program improvement.

Purpose: Simulation is an instructional modality that offers opportunities for assessment across many domains. The American College of Surgeons created the Accredited Education Institutes (AEIs) to build a community of high-quality simulation centers focused around improving surgical education and training. The goals of this project were to identify assessment methods used by AEIs, discuss how these methods align with established assessment frameworks, identify best practices, and provide guidance on best practice implementation. Methods: The authors analyzed responses regarding learner assessment, faculty assessment, and continuous program improvement from AEI accreditations surveys using deductive qualitative analysis. Results: Data from ninety-six centers were reviewed. Codes for each category were organized into formal and informal themes. For learner assessment, examinations and checklists identified as the most common types of formal assessment used and oral feedback as the most common type of informal assessment. For faculty assessment, written evaluations were the most common formal type and debriefs were the most common informal type. For continuous program improvement, written evaluations were the most common formal type and oral feedback was the most frequent informal type. Discussion: The goal of assessment should be to encourage learning through feedback and to ensure the attainment of educational competencies. The data revealed a variety of assessment modalities used to accomplish this goal with AEIs frequently utilizing some of the most reliable forms of assessment. We discuss how these forms of assessment can be integrated with best practices to develop assessment portfolios for learners and faculty, performance improvement reports for faculty, and assessments of clinical impact. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44186-023-00132-6.

Surgical skills training for practicing surgeons founded on established educational theories and frameworks.

Following completion of structured training in residency or fellowship programs, surgeons need to acquire new skills throughout their careers to address changes in their surgical practices, and to perform new procedures and use new technologies as these are developed. The opportunities available to surgeons to acquire the new skills, safely introduce these skills into surgical practice, and then maintain the skills, vary greatly and may not fully support a surgeon's needs. The article shares background information relating to the vexing problems, and describes established educational theories and frameworks as well as specific frameworks relating to surgical skills training and verification that may be used in designing and implementing comprehensive and impactful surgical skills training programs aimed at practicing surgeons. A number of practical strategies based on these theories and frameworks are highlighted. National professional organizations and academic medical centers need to play a critical role in pursuing such efforts, which will remain pivotal in supporting the professional work of surgeons and in providing optimal surgical care well into the future.

The American College of Surgeons Entering Resident Readiness Assessment (ACS ERRA): Validity Evidence From a Three-Year National Study.

OBJECTIVE: To gather validity evidence supporting the use and interpretation of scores from the American College of Surgeons Entering Resident Readiness Assessment (ACS ERRA) Program. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA: ACS ERRA is an online formative assessment program developed to assess entering surgery residents' ability to make critical clinical decisions, and includes 12 clinical areas and 20 topics identified by a national panel of surgeon educators and residency program directors. METHODS: Data from 3 national testing administrations of ACS ERRA (2018-2020) were used to gather validity evidence regarding content, response process, internal structure (reliability), relations to other variables, and consequences. RESULTS: Over the 3 administrations, 1975 surgery residents participated from 125 distinct residency programs. Overall scores [Mean = 64% (SD = 7%)] remained consistent across the 3 years ( P = 0.670). There were no significant differences among resident characteristics (gender, age, international medical graduate status). The mean case discrimination index was 0.54 [SD = 0.15]. Kappa inter-rater reliability for scoring was 0.87; the overall test score reliability (G-coefficient) was 0.86 (Ф-coefficient = 0.83). Residents who completed residency readiness programs had higher ACS ERRA scores (66% versus 63%, Cohen's d = 0.23, P < 0.001). On average, 15% of decisions made (21/140 per test) involved potentially harmful actions. Variability in scores from graduating medical schools (7%) carried over twice as much weight than from matched residency programs (3%). CONCLUSIONS: ACS ERRA scores provide valuable information to entering surgery residents and surgery program directors to aid in development of individual and group learning plans.

Surgery Clerkship Directors' Perceptions of the COVID-19 Pandemic's Impact on Medical Student Education.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the national impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the education of medical students assigned to surgery clerkship rotations, as reported by surgery clerkship directors(CDs). STUDY DESIGN: In the spring of 2020 and 2021, the authors surveyed 164 CDs from 144 LCME-accredited US medical schools regarding their views of the pandemic's impact on the surgery clerkship curriculum, students' experiences, outcomes, and institutional responses. RESULTS: Overall survey response rates, calculated as no. respondents/no. surveyed were 44.5%(73/164) and 50.6%(83/164) for the spring 2020 and 2021 surveys, respectively. Nearly all CDs(>95%) pivoted to virtual platforms and solutions. Most returned to some form of in-person learning by winter 2020, and pre-pandemic status by spring 2021(46%, 38/83). Students' progression to the next year was delayed by 12%(9/73), and preparation was negatively impacted by 45%(37/83). Despite these data, CDs perceived students' interest in surgical careers was not significantly affected(89% vs. 77.0%, p=0.09). Over the one-year study, the proportion of CDs reporting a severe negative impact on the curriculum dropped significantly(p<0.0001) for most parameters assessed except summative evaluations(40.3% vs. 45.7%,p=0.53). CDs(n=83) also noted the pandemic's positive impact with respect to virtual patient encounters(21.7%), didactics(16.9%), student test performance(16.9%), continuous personal learning(14.5%), engagement in the clerkship(9.6%) and student interest in surgery as a career(7.2%). CONCLUSION: During the pandemic, the severe negative impact on student educational programs lessened and novel virtual curricular solutions emerged. Student interest in surgery as a career was sustained. Measures of student competency and effectiveness of new curriculum, including telehealth, remain areas for future investigation.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on American College of Surgeons-Accredited Education Institutes & American Society of Anesthesiologists-Simulation Education Network: Opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic presented challenges for simulation programs including American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes and American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network. American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes and American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network leadership were surveyed to identify opportunities to enhance patient safety through simulation. METHODS: Between January and June 2021, surveys consisting of 3 targeted domains: (I) Changing practice; (II) Contributions and recognition; and (III) Moving ahead were distributed to 100 American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes and 54 American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network centers. Responses were combined and percent frequencies reported. RESULTS: Ninety-six respondents, representing 51 (51%) American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes, 17 (31.5%) American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network, and 28 dually accredited centers, completed the survey. Change of practice. Although 20.3% of centers stayed fully operational at the COVID-19 onset, 82% of all centers closed: 32% were closed less than 3 months, 28% were closed 3 to 6 months, 8% were closed 7 to 9 months, and 32% remained closed as of June 6, 2021. Most impacted activities were large-group instruction and team training. Sixty-nine percent of programs converted in-person to virtual programs. Contributions. The top reported innovative contributions included policies (80%), curricula (80%), and scholarly work (74%), Moving ahead. The respondents' top concerns were returning to high-quality training to best address learners' deficiencies and re-engagement of re-directed training programs. When asked "How the American College of Surgeons/American Society of Anesthesiologists Programs could best assist your simulation center goals?" the top responses were "facilitate collaboration" and "publish best practices from this work." CONCLUSION: The Pandemic presented multiple challenges and opportunities for simulation centers. Opportunities included collaboration between American College of Surgeons Accredited Education Institutes and the American Society of Anesthesiologists Simulation Education Network to identify best practices and resources needed to enhance patient safety through simulation.

American College of Surgeons Objective Assessment of Skills in Surgery (ACS OASIS): A Formative Assessment of Junior Residents' Technical Skills.

OBJECTIVE: The objective assessment of technical skills of junior residents is essential in implementing competency-based training and providing specific feedback regarding areas for improvement. An innovative assessment that can be easily implemented by training programs nationwide has been developed by expert surgeon educators under the aegis of the American College of Surgeons (ACS) Division of Education. This assessment, ACS Objective Assessment of Skills in Surgery (ACS OASIS) uses eight stations to address technical skills important for junior residents within the domains of laparoscopic appendectomy, excision of lipoma, central line placement, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, trocar placement, exploratory laparotomy, repair of enterotomy, and tube thoracostomy. The purpose of this study was to implement ACS OASIS at a number of sites to study its psychometric rigor. DESIGN: The ACS OASIS was pre-piloted at two programs to establish feasibility and to gather information regarding implementation. Each skills station was 12 minutes long, and the faculty completed a checklist with 5 to 15 items, and a global assessment scale. The study was then repeated at three pilot sites and included 29 junior residents who were assessed by a total of 44 faculty. Psychometric data for the stations and checklists were collected and analyzed. SETTING: The pre-pilot sites were Geisinger and University of Tennessee Knoxville.Data were gathered from pilot sites that included Wellspan Health, Duke University, and University of California Los Angeles. RESULTS: The mean checklist score for all learners was 76% (IQR of 66%-85%). The average global rating was 3.36 on a 5-point scale with a standard deviation of 0.56. The overall cut score derived using the borderline group method was at 68% with 34% of performances requiring remediation. Using this criterion, the average number of stations that were completed by each learner without need for remediation was five.The station discrimination index ranged from 0.27 to 0.65 (all above the threshold of 0.25), demonstrating solid psychometric characteristics at the station level. The internal-consistency reliability was 0.76 with SEM of 5.8%. The inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation) was high at 0.73 with general agreement of 79% between the two raters. The station discrimination was at 0.45 (range of 0.27 to 0.65) indicating a high level of differentiation between high and low performers. Using the generalizability theory, the G-coefficient reliability was at 0.72 with the reliability projection flattening after 8 stations. Overall, 75% to 82% the faculty and learners rated ACS OASIS as realistic and beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: ACS OASIS is a psychometrically sound technical skills assessment tool that can provide useful information for feedback to junior residents and support efforts to remediate gaps in performance.

One-Year Follow-Up of COVID-19 Impact on Surgical Education: Clinical Training Restored but Surgical Trainee Emotional Well-Being Still at Risk.

BACKGROUND: A previous survey documented the severe disruption of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on surgical education and trainee well-being during the initial surge and systemic lockdowns. Herein, we report the results of a follow-up survey inclusive of the 2020 to 2021 academic year. STUDY DESIGN: A survey was distributed to education leaders across all surgical specialties in summer 2021. We compared the proportion of participants reporting severe disruption in key areas with those of the spring 2020 survey. Aggregated differences by year were assessed using chi-square analysis. RESULTS: In 2021, severe disruption of education programs was reported by 14% compared with 32% in 2020 (p < 0.0001). Severe reductions in nonemergency surgery were reported by 38% compared with 87% of respondents in 2020. Severe disruption of expected progression of surgical trainee autonomy by rank also significantly decreased to 5% to 8% in 2021 from 15% to 23% in 2020 among respondent programs (p < 0.001). In 2021 clinical remediation was reported for postgraduate year 1 to 2 and postgraduate year 3 to 4, typically through revised rotations (19% and 26%) and additional use of simulation (20% and 19%) maintaining trainee promotion and job placement. In 2021, surgical trainees' physical safety and health were reported as less severely impacted compared with 2020; however, negative effects of isolation (77%), burnout (75%), and the severe impact on emotional well-being (17%) were prevalent. CONCLUSIONS: One year after the initial coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak, clinical training and surgical trainee health were less negatively impacted. Disruption of emotional well-being remained high. Future needs include better objective measures of clinical competence beyond case numbers and the implementation of novel programs to promote surgical trainee health and well-being.

Resident Readiness for Senior Level Decision Making: Identifying the Domains for Formative Assessment and Feedback.

OBJECTIVE: To establish expert consensus regarding the domains and topics for senior surgery residents (PGY-4) to make critical decisions and assume senior-level responsibilities, and to develop the formative American College of Surgeons Senior Resident Readiness Assessment (ACS SRRA) Program. DESIGN: The American College of Surgeons (ACS) education leadership team conducted a focus group with surgical experts to identify the content for an assessment tool to evaluate senior residents' readiness for their increased levels of responsibility. After the focus group, national experts were recruited to develop consensus on the topics through three rounds of surveys using Delphi methodology. The Delphi participants rated topics using Likert-type scales and their comments were incorporated into subsequent rounds. Consensus was defined as ≥ 80% agreement with internal-consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha) ≥ 0.8. In a stepwise fashion, topics that did not achieve consensus for inclusion were removed from subsequent survey rounds. SETTING: The surveys were administered via an online questionnaire. PARTICIPANTS: Twelve program directors and assistant program directors made up the focus group. The 39 Delphi participants represented seven different surgical subspecialties and were from diverse practice settings. The median length of experience in general surgery resident education was 20 years (IQR 14.3-30.0) with 64% of the experts being either current or past general surgery residency program directors. RESULTS: The response rate was 100% and Cronbach's alpha was ≥ 0.9 for each round. The Delphi participants contributed a large number of comments. Of the 201 topics that were evaluated initially, 120 topics in 25 core clinical areas were included to create the final domains of ACS SRRA. CONCLUSIONS: National consensus on the domain of the ACS SRRA has been achieved via the modified Delphi method among expert surgeon educators. ACS SRRA will identify clinical topics and areas in which each senior resident needs improvement and provide data to residents and residency programs to develop individualized learning plans. This would help in preparing the senior residents to assume their responsibilities and support their readiness for future fellowship training or surgical practice.

Artificial Intelligence Methods and Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Metrics for Surgical Education: A Multidisciplinary Consensus.

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) methods and AI-enabled metrics hold tremendous potential to advance surgical education. Our objective was to generate consensus guidance on specific needs for AI methods and AI-enabled metrics for surgical education. STUDY DESIGN: The study included a systematic literature search, a virtual conference, and a 3-round Delphi survey of 40 representative multidisciplinary stakeholders with domain expertise selected through purposeful sampling. The accelerated Delphi process was completed within 10 days. The survey covered overall utility, anticipated future (10-year time horizon), and applications for surgical training, assessment, and feedback. Consensus was agreement among 80% or more respondents. We coded survey questions into 11 themes and descriptively analyzed the responses. RESULTS: The respondents included surgeons (40%), engineers (15%), affiliates of industry (27.5%), professional societies (7.5%), regulatory agencies (7.5%), and a lawyer (2.5%). The survey included 155 questions; consensus was achieved on 136 (87.7%). The panel listed 6 deliverables each for AI-enhanced learning curve analytics and surgical skill assessment. For feedback, the panel identified 10 priority deliverables spanning 2-year (n = 2), 5-year (n = 4), and 10-year (n = 4) timeframes. Within 2 years, the panel expects development of methods to recognize anatomy in images of the surgical field and to provide surgeons with performance feedback immediately after an operation. The panel also identified 5 essential that should be included in operative performance reports for surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi panel consensus provides a specific, bold, and forward-looking roadmap for AI methods and AI-enabled metrics for surgical education.

What are the Top Research Priorities in Surgical Simulation and How Can They Be Best Addressed? Results From a Multidisciplinary Consensus Conference.

OBJECTIVES: To define the top priorities in simulation-based surgical education where additional research would have the highest potential to advance the field and develop proposals that would address the identified research priorities. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA: Simulation has become integral part of surgical training but there are a number of outstanding questions that have slowed advances in this field. METHODS: The Delphi methodology was used to define the top priorities in simulation-based surgical education. A research summit was held with multiple stakeholders under the auspices of the American College of Surgeons Division of Education to develop proposals to address these priorities. RESULTS: Consensus was achieved after the first round of voting on the following 3 most important topics: (1) impact of simulation training on patient safety and outcomes, (2) the value proposition of simulation, and (3) the use of simulation for physician certification and credentialing. Knowledge gaps, challenges and opportunities, and research questions to address these topics were defined by summit participants. CONCLUSIONS: The top 3 priorities in surgical simulation research were defined and project outlines were developed for impactful projects on these topics. Successful completion of such projects is expected to advance the field of simulation-based surgical education.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical trainee education and well-being spring 2020-winter 2020: A path forward.

BACKGROUND: The time course and longitudinal impact of the COVID -19 pandemic on surgical education(SE) and learner well-being (LWB)is unknown. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Check-in surveys were distributed to Surgery Program Directors and Department Chairs, including general surgery and surgical specialties, in the summer and winter of 2020 and compared to a survey from spring 2020. Statistical associations for items with self-reported ACGME Stage and the survey period were assessed using categorical analysis. RESULTS: Stage 3 institutions were reported in spring (30%), summer (4%) [p < 0.0001] and increased in the winter (18%). Severe disruption (SD) was stage dependent (Stage 3; 45% (83/184) vs. Stages 1 and 2; 26% (206/801)[p < 0.0001]). This lessened in the winter (23%) vs. spring (32%) p = 0.02. LWB severe disruption was similar in spring 27%, summer 22%, winter 25% and was associated with Stage 3. CONCLUSIONS: Steps taken during the pandemic reduced SD but did not improve LWB. Systemic efforts are needed to protect learners and combat isolation pervasive in a pandemic.

Coaching in Surgical Education: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to review the coaching literature to (1) characterize the criteria integral to the coaching process, specifically in surgery, and (2) describe how these criteria have been variably implemented in published studies. BACKGROUND: Coaching is a distinct educational intervention, but within surgery the term is frequently used interchangeably with other more established terms such as teaching and mentoring. METHODS: A systematic search was performed of the MEDLINE and Cochrane databases to identify studies that used coach/coaching as an intervention for surgeons for either technical or nontechnical skills. Study quality was evaluated using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI). RESULTS: A total of 2280 articles were identified and after screening by title, abstract and full text, 35 remained. Thirteen coaching criteria (a-m) were identified in 4 general categories: 1. overarching goal (a. refine performance of an existing skill set), 2. the coach (b. trusting partnership, c. avoids assessment, d. 2-way communication), the coachee (e. voluntary participation, f. self-reflection, g. goal setting, h. action plan, i. outcome evaluation), and the coach-coachee rapport (j. coaching training, k. structured coaching model, l. non-directive, m. open ended questions). Adherence to these criteria ranged from as high of 73% of studies (voluntary participation of coach and coachee) to as low as 7% (use of open-ended questions). CONCLUSIONS: Coaching is being used inconsistently within the surgical education literature. Our hope is that with establishing criteria for coaching, future studies will implement this intervention more consistently and allow for better comparison and generalization of results.

Preceptoring, proctoring, mentoring, and coaching in surgery.

Contemporary models of surgical education that are founded on sound educational theories and constructs need to be used across the continuum of professional development of surgeons starting with the first day of medical school, through surgery residency and fellowship training, to the last day of surgical practice. The highly learner-centered and individually-focused special interventions of preceptoring, proctoring, mentoring, and coaching should be linked to innovative competency-based education models to address the educational needs of learners at all levels, and especially of surgeons in practice to continually improve their knowledge, skills, and performance, with the aspirational goal of achieving expertise and mastery. Each of these interventions is distinct with its own unique characteristics, applications, and anticipated impact, which must be clearly recognized for the interventions to be used most effectively. Broad acceptance and adoption of the aforementioned special interventions require recognition of the value each brings to the learner and the educational program. Professional organizations should play a key role in designing innovative educational programs that include these interventions, supporting their integration into surgical education and surgical practice, and influencing changes in the cultures in surgery to facilitate broad adoption of these interventions.

Defining the need for faculty development in assessment.

BACKGROUND: High-quality workplace-based assessments are essential for competency-based surgical education. We explored education leaders' perceptions regarding faculty competence in assessment. METHODS: Surgical education leaders were surveyed regarding which areas faculty needed improvement, and knowledge of assessment tools. Respondents were queried on specific skills regarding (a)importance in resident/medical student education (b)competence of faculty in assessment and feedback. RESULTS: Surveys (n = 636) were emailed, 103 responded most faculty needed improvement in: verbal (86%) and written (83%) feedback, assessing operative skill (49%) and preparation for procedures (50%). Cholecystectomy, trauma laparotomy, inguinal herniorrhaphy were "very-extremely important" in resident education (99%), but 21-24% thought faculty "moderately to not-at-all" competent in assessment. This gap was larger for non-technical skills. Regarding assessment tools, 56% used OSATS, 49% Zwisch; most were unfamiliar with all non-technical tools. SUMMARY: These data demonstrate a significant perceived gap in competence of faculty in assessment and feedback, and unfamiliarity with assessment tools. This can inform faculty development to support competency-based surgical education.