Search

Importance: Although men are increasingly involved in childrearing, little is known about paternity leave in surgical residency. Conflict between professional and family duties contribute to burnout and decreased career satisfaction for surgeons of both sexes. With men more likely than women to have children during their clinical years of surgical training, understanding the issues surrounding paternity leave is imperative to ensuring the longevity of our workforce., Objective: To explore surgical program directors' perspectives on the challenges of providing paternity leave., Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative descriptive study of transcripts collected from semistructured interviews of US surgical program directors was performed from October 2018 to June 2019. Program directors were selected using purposive-stratified criterion-based sampling. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, with emergent themes identified using content analysis., Exposure: Paternity leave., Main Outcomes and Measures: Program directors' perspectives on paternity leave were categorized into common themes., Results: A total of 40 US general surgery program directors were interviewed (28 male [70%]; mean [SD] age, 49.7 [6.8] years; 36 [90%] were university-based programs). Twenty (50%) reported providing paternity leave of 1-week duration. Five major themes were identified: (1) paternity leave policies are poorly defined by many programs and require self-initiation by residents; (2) residents often do not take the full amount of time offered for leave; (3) stigma against male residents taking parental leave is common and may be even greater than that facing women taking maternity leave; (4) paternity leave has little to no impact on colleagues' workload owing to the brevity of time taken; and (5) men desire longer leave than what they are currently offered and wish to receive equal time off compared with childbearing parents., Conclusions and Relevance: Surgical program directors report male residents take brief paternity leave despite a desire for more time off, which may be influenced by fear of stigma and surgical culture that avoids handing off work, even for short periods of time. A cultural shift toward supporting family planning as a normal part of young adult life, rather than a medical condition to be accommodated, is necessary to promote life balance and behaviors that will sustain a long career in surgery. Implementation of defined leave policies at individual programs for the nonchildbearing parent is critical to make parental leave socially acceptable among surgical residents.

Background: Resident evaluation of faculty teaching is an important metric in general surgery training, however considerable variability in faculty teaching evaluation (FE) instruments exists., Study Design: Twenty-two general surgery programs provided their FE and program demographics. Three clinical education experts performed blinded assessment of FEs, assessing adherence 2018 ACGME common program standards and if the FE was meaningful., Results: Number of questions per FE ranged from 1 to 29. The expert assessments demonstrated that no evaluation addressed all 5 ACGME standards. There were significant differences in the FEs effectiveness of assessing the 5 ACGME standards (p < 0.001), with teaching abilities and professionalism rated the highest and scholarly activities the lowest., Conclusion: There was wide variation between programs regarding FEs development and adhered to ACGME standards. Faculty evaluation tools consistently built around all suggested ACGME standards may allow for a more accurate and useful assessment of faculty teaching abilities to target professional development., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In specialties with gender imbalance, such as general surgery, women faculty frequently receive lower teaching evaluation scores compared with men, which can affect academic advancement., Study Design: We collected 1 year of anonymous resident-derived faculty teaching evaluations from 21 general surgery programs, along with resident, faculty, and department leadership gender complement. A composite evaluation score was calculated for each faculty. After accounting for within-program correlations, we compared male and female scores using the cluster-adjusted t-test to describe the respective mean differences with a 95% CI. Programs were divided into quartiles based on percent female faculty, female residents, and combined total females to detect associations between female representation and faculty teaching evaluation scores., Results: The 21 programs yielded 20,187 teaching evaluations of 1,177 faculty. Women comprised 28% of the faculty, 47% of residents, 43% of program directors, and 19% of department chairs. Overall, women faculty had significantly higher evaluation scores than men (90.6% vs 89.5%, p < 0.05). Female gender was associated with higher teaching evaluation scores compared with male faculty in the lowest quartiles for all combinations of women representation., Conclusions: This multi-institutional analysis of general surgical resident evaluations of faculty identified that female gender was associated with higher evaluation scores than men (although the difference was small). This unanticipated finding might reflect the slowly changing gender balance within general surgery and attitudes towards female faculty in a traditionally male-dominated field. Contrary to our hypothesis, female gender was associated with higher faculty evaluation scores at programs with fewer women faculty and fewer women residents., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires diversity in residency. The self-identified race/ethnicities of general surgery applicants, residents, and core teaching faculty were assessed to evaluate underrepresented minority (URM) representation in surgery residency programs and to determine the impact of URM faculty and residents on URM applicants' selection for interview or match., Study Design: Data from the 2018 application cycle were collated for 10 general surgery programs. Applicants without a self-identified race/ethnicity were excluded. URMs were defined as those identifying as black/African American, Hispanic/Latino/of Spanish origin, and American Indian/Alaskan Native/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander-Samoan. Statistical analyses included chi-square tests and a multivariate model., Results: Ten surgery residency programs received 9,143 applications from 3,067 unique applicants. Applications from white, Asian, Hispanic/Latino, black/African American, and American Indian applicants constituted 66%, 19%, 8%, 7% and 1%, respectively, of those applications selected to interview and 66%, 13%, 11%, 8%, and 2%, respectively, of applications resulting in a match. Among programs' 272 core faculty and 318 current residents, 10% and 21%, respectively, were identified as URMs. As faculty diversity increased, there was no difference in selection to interview for URM (odds ratio [OR] 0.83; 95% CI 0.54 to 1.28, per 10% increase in faculty diversity) or non-URM applicants (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.57 to 0.81). Similarly, greater URM representation among current residents did not affect the likelihood of being selected for an interview for URM (OR 1.20; 95%CI 0.90 to 1.61) vs non-URM applicants (OR 1.28; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.45). Current resident and faculty URM representation was correlated (r = 0.8; p = 0.005)., Conclusions: Programs with a greater proportion of URM core faculty or residents did not select a greater proportion of URM applicants for interview. However, core faculty and resident racial diversity were correlated. Recruitment of racially/ethnically diverse trainees and faculty will require ongoing analysis to develop effective recruitment strategies., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This study aimed to identify the empirical processes and evidence that expert surgical teachers use to determine whether to take over certain steps or entrust the resident with autonomy to proceed during an operation., Background: Assessing real-time entrustability is inherent in attending surgeons' determinations of residents' intraoperative autonomy in the operating room. To promote residents' autonomy, it is necessary to understand how attending surgeons evaluate residents' performance and support opportunities for independent practice based on the assessment of their entrustability., Methods: We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with 43 expert surgical teachers from 21 institutions across 4 regions of the United States, using purposeful and snowball sampling. Participants represented a range of program types, program size, and clinical expertise. We applied the Framework Method of content analysis to iteratively analyze interview transcripts and identify emergent themes., Results: We identified a 3-phase process used by most expert surgical teachers in determining whether to take over intraoperatively or entrust the resident to proceed, including 1) monitoring performance and "red flags," 2) assessing entrustability, and 3) granting autonomy. Factors associated with individual surgeons (eg, level of comfort, experience, leadership role) and the context (eg, patient safety, case, and time) influenced expert surgical teachers' determinations of entrustability and residents' final autonomy., Conclusion: Expert surgical teachers' 3-phase process of decisions on take-over provides a potential framework that may help surgeons identify appropriate opportunities to develop residents' progressive autonomy by engaging the resident in the determination of entrustability before deciding to take over.

Objective: We sought to understand the experiences of surgical residents and faculty with treating culturally diverse patients, and identify recommendations for establishing and implementing structured cultural competency training., Summary Background Data: Cultural competency training for medical professionals could reduce healthcare disparities, yet is currently not a standard part of surgical residency training. Few studies have explored the perspectives of surgical residents and faculty on the skills needed to provide cross-cultural care., Study Design: A purposeful sample of surgical residents and faculty from 4 academic institutions was recruited for semistructured qualitative interviews. We developed an in-depth interview guide and performed interviews to thematic saturation. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using grounded theory methodology., Results: We interviewed 16 attending surgeons and 15 surgical residents. Participant demographics were: male (51.6%), White (58.1%), Black (9.7%), Asian (22.5%), and Hispanic (9.7%). Four main themes emerged from the data: 1) aspects of culture that can inform patient care; 2) specific cultural challenges related to surgical care, including informed consent, pain management, difficult diagnoses and refusal of treatment, emergency situations, and end-of-life issues; 3) need for culturally competent care in surgery to navigate cultural differences; 4) perceived challenges and facilitators to incorporating cultural competency into the current training paradigm., Conclusions: Surgeons identified the need to provide better cross-cultural care and proposed tenets for training. Based on these findings, we suggest the development and dissemination of a cultural dexterity training program that will provide surgeons with specific knowledge and skills to care for patients from diverse sociocultural backgrounds.

Purpose: Recent studies have focused on surgeons' nontechnical skills in the operating room (OR), especially leadership. In an attempt to identify trainee preferences, we explored junior residents' opinions about the OR leadership style of teaching faculty., Methods: Overall, 20 interns and 20 mid-level residents completed a previously validated survey on the style of leadership they encountered, the style they preferred to receive, and the style they personally employed in the OR. In all, 4 styles were explored; authoritative: leader makes decisions and communicates them firmly; explanatory: leader makes decisions promptly, but explains them fully; consultative: leader consults with trainees when important decisions are made, and delegative: leader puts the problem before the group and makes decisions by majority opinion. Comparisons were completed using chi-square analysis., Results: Junior resident preference for leadership style of attending surgeons in the OR differed from what they encountered. Overall, 62% of residents encountered an authoritative leadership style; however, only 9% preferred this (p < 0.001). Instead, residents preferred explanatory (53%) or consultative styles (41%). Preferences differed by postgraduate year. Although 40% of interns preferred a consultative style, 50% of mid-level residents preferred explanatory leadership., Conclusions: Junior resident preference of leadership style in the OR differs from what they actually encounter. This has the potential to create unwanted tension and may erode team performance. Awareness of this difference provides an opportunity for an educational intervention directed at both attendings and trainees., (Copyright © 2015 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: PhD and EdD educators in departments of surgery have and are increasingly becoming valuable colleagues. Professional educators typically assist chairpersons and program directors by positively impacting the education, research, and service missions., Objective: The purpose of this article is 3-fold: (1) to identify ways of finding prospective PhD/EdD educators, (2) to recognize ways to work with educators in a complimentary way so the educator and directors mutually benefit, and (3) to identify various ways departments and programs can benefit from employing a professional educator., (Copyright © 2012 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Practicing within the Halstedian model of surgical education, academic surgeons serve dual roles as physicians to their patients and educators of their trainees. Despite this significant responsibility, few surgeons receive formal training in educational theory to inform their practice. The goal of this work was to gain an understanding of how master surgeons approach teaching uncommon and highly complex operations and to determine the educational constructs that frame their teaching philosophies and approaches., Design: Individuals included in the study were queried using electronically distributed open-ended, structured surveys. Responses to the surveys were analyzed and grouped using grounded theory and were examined for parallels to concepts of learning theory., Setting: Academic teaching hospital., Participants: Twenty-two individuals identified as master surgeons., Results: Twenty-one (95.5%) individuals responded to the survey. Two primary thematic clusters were identified: global approach to teaching (90.5% of respondents) and approach to intraoperative teaching (76.2%). Many of the emergent themes paralleled principles of transfer learning theory outlined in the psychology and education literature. Key elements included: conferring graduated responsibility (57.1%), encouraging development of a mental set (47.6%), fostering or expecting deliberate practice (42.9%), deconstructing complex tasks (38.1%), vertical transfer of information (33.3%), and identifying general principles to structure knowledge (9.5%)., Conclusions: Master surgeons employ many of the principles of learning theory when teaching uncommon and highly complex operations. The findings may hold significant implications for faculty development in surgical education., (Copyright © 2012 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)