Program Website Evaluation Regarding Dedicated Research Years Offered in General Surgery Residency Programs in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Research is a vital component in the advancements of surgical sciences due to the reliance of treatment options on innovations and outcomes of patient care. This study aimed to identify research pathways, opportunities, and academic productivities of different general surgery residency programs in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A web-based review was conducted concerning accredited US general surgery residency programs. Each program's official website was assessed for the availability of research year, compulsory status, duration, type, structure, and location. The study also identified faculty supervision, research day, funding, output, and opportunities to obtain an advanced degree. RESULTS: Data were collected from all 313 general surgery programs in the United States, out of which 127 (41%) offered a dedicated research year to their residents. The research year was deemed mandatory in 27 programs (8%) and optional in 100 programs (32%). Seventy-two programs (23%) offered to start the dedicated research year after postgraduate year 2 or postgraduate year 3. Twenty-two programs (7.02%) provided examples of resident publications and presentations. Resident research day was cited by 42 programs (13.41%). On campus research opportunity was mentioned by nine programs (2.8%), while the off campus chance was provided by 10 programs (3.19%). Furthermore, 36 programs (11.5%) demonstrated potential funding sources. Finally, 38 (12.14%) programs mentioned receiving advanced degrees after the research year. CONCLUSIONS: Although dedicated research time is provided to trainees for some research programs, there is a lack of structure and the need to expand the available content and information regarding research opportunities for the various general surgery residency programs.

Perceptions of General Surgery Program Leadership and Residents on Research Sabbatical.

INTRODUCTION: The incorporation of a 1-y- or 2-y research period during general surgery residency is increasingly common in many academic programs, yet often, it is heterogeneously structured and ill-defined. This survey-based observational study aimed to characterize the perceptions of general surgery program directors (PDs) and residents regarding an in-training, dedicated research sabbatical. METHODS: Two surveys were conducted using Qualtrics software. One survey was sent to general surgery residency PDs, and the other was sent to general surgery residents currently on a research sabbatical. The primary aim of the survey was to assess the PDs' and research residents' perceptions of the research sabbatical. RESULTS: Seven hundred and fifty-two surveys were analyzed, of which 120 were from PDs and 632 from research residents. Among the residents, 44.1% felt that the research time delayed their surgical training. Regarding research funding, 46.7% of the responding residents said that their residency program funded their research, 30.9% said they acquired funding independently, and 19.1% said that it came from a combination of residency program and independent funding. Finally, regarding how residents found their research opportunity, 42.7% said they found it independently and 53.3% said their program provided it. CONCLUSIONS: Research sabbaticals during residency may be considered essential to academic development. However, in this survey-based study, perceptions of research time and its structure varied greatly between PDs and residents. An intentional push toward developing guidelines for research sabbaticals may benefit residency program leadership and residents.

Perceptions and Early Outcomes of the Acuity Circles Allocation Policy Among Liver Transplant Centers in the United States.

Recently, a new liver allocation policy called the acuity circles (AC) framework was implemented to decrease geographic disparities in transplant metrics across donor service areas. Early analyses have examined the changes in outcomes because of the AC policy. However, perceptions among transplant surgeons and staff regarding the new policy remain unknown. Methods: A 28-item survey was sent to division chiefs and surgical directors of liver transplantation across the United States. Questions assessed the respondents' perceptions regarding center-level metrics and staff satisfaction. We used Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data to study differences in allocation between the pre-AC implementation period (2019) and the post-AC implementation period (2020-2021). Results: A total of 40 participants completed this ongoing survey study. Most responses were from region 8 (13%), region 10 (15%), and region 11 (13%). Sixty-three percent of respondents stated that the wait time for a suitable offer for recipients with model of end-stage liver disease score <30 has decreased, whereas 50% stated that wait time for a suitable offer for recipients with model of end-stage liver disease score >30 has increased. However, most respondents (75%) felt that the average cost per transplant had increased and that the rate of surgical complications and 1-y graft survival had remained the same. In most states, an observable decrease in in-state liver transplantations occurred each year between 2019 and 2021. In addition, most allocation regions reported an increase in donations after circulatory deaths between 2019 and 2021. Conclusions: Perceptions of the new AC policy among liver transplant surgeons in the United States remain mixed, highlighting the potential strengths and concerns regarding its future impact. Further studies should assess the effects of the AC policy on clinical outcomes and liver transplantation access.

Does Chronic Use of Steroids Affect Outcomes After Liver Resection? Analysis of a National Database.

INTRODUCTION: With the increasing age of patients, more patients on chronic preoperative steroids are undergoing liver resections. Our study aimed to assess the relationship between preoperative steroids and outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the 2014-2019 NSQIP database of all patients undergoing liver resections. Propensity score matching was utilized to match the two groups (chronic steroids vs. no steroids) based on demographics, preoperative laboratory data, and operative findings. The primary outcome measure was mortality. RESULTS: There were 712 patients in the chronic steroid group and 21,751 in the no steroid group. After propensity score matching; there were 420 patients in both groups. Post-match analysis again demonstrated that patients on chronic steroids were at higher risk of cardiac arrest than those not on steroids (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.02-2.45, p = 0.04). In addition, rates of organ space wound infection (OR 2.66, CI 1.33-5.38, p = 0.03), superficial wound infection (OR 2.79, CI 1.08-5.41, p = 0.035), renal insufficiency (OR 1.25, CI 1.03-1.62, p = 0.02), postoperative sepsis (OR 1.28, CI 1.08-1.82, p = 0.04), DVT (OR 1.7, CI 1.01-2.82, p = 0.04), and bile leakage (OR 1.75, CI 1.24-3.36, p = 0.04) were also increased in patients on steroids. However, the matched cohorts were similar in postoperative mortality rates (OR 0.11, CI 0.6-1.17, p = 0.72). CONCLUSION: The study found higher morbidity rates in patients undergoing liver resections on chronic preoperative steroids but no differences in mortality.

Evaluating General Surgical Residency Education Structure and Incorporation of the Resident as Educator Model.

BACKGROUND: General surgery education has continued to evolve regarding test preparation, simulation, and skill acquisition. The "Resident as Educator" (RAE) model has been proposed and enacted by programs as a viable education model for general surgery education. This study examines the current education structures in general surgery residency programs in the United States and how many programs have adopted the RAE model or aspects of the model. METHODS: A 20-question survey regarding education structure was distributed to all program directors in October 2021. Questions focused on the involvement of residents in leading education sessions, creating the weekly education schedule, program feedback to residents on teaching, and recognition for distinguished resident educators. RESULTS: A total of 156 programs responded to the survey. The response rate was 60%. 76.4% of the respondents have a combination of resident and faculty-led didactic sessions, 8.5% have an RAE model, and 15% have faculty-led education sessions. In terms of concerns regarding resident-led didactics-24.4% of respondents stated that their main concern would be the quality of education provided, and 20.4% referenced low resident satisfaction levels with resident-led education. There were no differences among the groups regarding the American Board of Surgery board passage rates. CONCLUSIONS: Most residency programs have adopted a model in which residents have significant involvement in creating and maintaining the education calendar and leading formal education sessions. However, only 8.5% have a purely resident-led educational curriculum among the responding programs. More studies are needed to assess how to implement a resident as educator model successfully.

Should Radiological Assessment be Part of Core General Surgery Competency? A Survey of the General Surgery Residents.

BACKGROUND: Radiological assessment is an important skill to develop in general surgery training. Therefore, we aimed to determine general surgery residents' points of view on receiving formal radiology didactics. METHODS: We performed an anonymous survey of general surgery residents throughout the USA. The survey queried the residents' postgraduate year, training program type, diagnostic radiology education in their training program, as well as the residents' comfort level in interpreting various imaging modalities, followed by a series of images to assess the residents' ability to interpret images showing various surgical disease processes. RESULTS: A total of 365 residents responded to the survey. In total, 76.6% of the respondent states that there is no structured didactic session in their program on radiological studies. However, 66.3% felt that interpretation of radiological images should be used to determine surgical competency and promotion to the next academic year. In terms of accurately reading images-68.7% of the residents were able to read an X-ray showing cecal volvulus correctly, 51.9% were able to read a cholangiogram correctly, and 95.3% were correctly read an X-ray showing free under the diaphragm. CONCLUSION: Most residents favored having radiological assessments as part of the competency evaluation. Furthermore, a curriculum and inbuilt training structure that aims to ensure residents develop competent clinical image interpretation abilities may enhance the development and retention of such skills, ultimately influencing patient outcomes.