Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Office-Based Procedure Training in Laryngology Fellowship Programs.
Enver, Necati; Ramaswamy, Apoorva; Sulica, Lucian; Pitman, Michael J.
Affiliation
  • Enver N; Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Center for Voice and Swallowing, Columbia University Irvine Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York, U.S.A.
  • Ramaswamy A; Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, Sean Parker Institute for the Voice, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, U.S.A.
  • Sulica L; Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Pitman MJ; Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Columbia University Irvine Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York, U.S.A.
Laryngoscope ; 131(9): 2054-2058, 2021 09.
Article de En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33043999
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To assess the current practices and challenges of training office-based procedures to laryngology fellows in the United States.

METHODS:

An anonymous web-based survey study was distributed to laryngology fellowship program directors, as listed by the American Laryngological Association. The survey was a 19-item questionnaire with free-text, Likert scale, and multiple-choice answers.

RESULTS:

Twenty-two of 27 program directors (81.4%) replied to the survey. Many programs (8/16) have three or more laryngologists and do more than 10 procedures each week (10/16). Sixty-nine percent (11/16) of directors had not been trained for office procedures in their fellowship. The fellows are allowed to be primary surgeon on 68.75% and 75% of vocal fold augmentation and laser procedures, respectively. The expected competencies for these procedures on graduation are average-moderate and moderate. When program directors asked about the methods used for training, a minority of them use simulators (2/16), procedural checklists (2/16), or structured debriefing (2/16). The most commonly used methods were case-based troubleshooting (13/16) and unstructured debriefing (13/16). Patients being awake and patients' expectations are seen as the most important obstacles. Most of the directors thought office-based procedure training could be improved (14/16). The most common suggestions were using step-wise checklists, simulator-labs, and formal debriefings.

CONCLUSION:

This is the first study evaluating the training of office-based laryngeal procedures during laryngology fellowship. Given the increasing importance of these procedures in practice and the herein identified barriers and need for improvement, fellowships should investigate the use of systematic training tools to improve fellow competency with office-based procedures. Laryngoscope, 1312054-2058, 2021.
Sujet(s)
Mots clés

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Oto-rhino-laryngologie / Éducation / Enseignement spécialisé en médecine / Procédures de chirurgie ambulatoire Type d'étude: Qualitative_research Limites: Humans Pays/Région comme sujet: America do norte Langue: En Journal: Laryngoscope Sujet du journal: OTORRINOLARINGOLOGIA Année: 2021 Type de document: Article Pays d'affiliation: États-Unis d'Amérique

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Oto-rhino-laryngologie / Éducation / Enseignement spécialisé en médecine / Procédures de chirurgie ambulatoire Type d'étude: Qualitative_research Limites: Humans Pays/Région comme sujet: America do norte Langue: En Journal: Laryngoscope Sujet du journal: OTORRINOLARINGOLOGIA Année: 2021 Type de document: Article Pays d'affiliation: États-Unis d'Amérique
...