Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 28, Issue 11, pp 3179–3185

Establishing technical performance norms for general surgery residents

  • Dimitrios Stefanidis
  • Harsh Grewal
  • John T. Paige
  • James R. Korndorffer
  • Daniel J. Scott
  • Dmitry Nepomnayshy
  • David A. Edelman
  • Chris Sievers
Article

Abstract

Background

Surgery residents are required to achieve performance milestones to advance in their residency. Level-specific, technical performance norms that could be used as milestones, however, do not currently exist. Our aim was to develop level-specific, technical performance norms for general surgery residents on select simulated tasks across multiple institutions.

Study Design

An IRB-approved, prospective, multi-institutional collaborative study with voluntary participation of residents was undertaken at the start of the 2011–2012 academic year. General surgery residents (PGY I–V) from seven institutions were tested on three laparoscopic and five open simulated surgical tasks, and their performance was assessed based on task time and errors. Means and standard deviations of performance for each resident level were calculated and compared. Residents with performance 1 standard deviation below the mean were considered outliers.

Results

A total of 147 residents were evaluated. Mean resident age was 28 ± 3 years; 42 % were female; and they had attended 74 different medical schools. Senior residents (PGY III–V) had more clinical and simulator experience than junior residents (PGY I–II) (p < 0.001). Resident performance scores progressively increased in all tasks reaching a plateau at a lower PGY level for open tasks. Depending on the task, 0–18 % of residents were outliers. When surveyed, 66 % of residents agreed that national performance norms for residents should exist.

Conclusions

Performance norms were established for select tasks in a representative sample of US surgery residents. Such performance norms allow a more informed assessment of resident skill through comparison to national data and enable the identification of outliers who may benefit from additional training.

Keywords

Simulation Surgery residents Technical performance assessment Simulator proficiency Performance norms 

Abbreviations

ACGME

Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education

ABS

American Board of Surgery

ANOVA

Analysis of variance

APDS

Association of Program Directors in Surgery

ASE

Association for Surgical Education

UTSW

Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS), University of Texas Southwestern’s

IRB

Institutional review board

OR

Operating room

PGY

Post-graduate year

References

  1. 1.
    Magill R (2004) Motor learning and control: concepts and applications, 7th edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nasca TJ, Philibert I, Brigham T, Flynn TC (2012) The next GME accreditation system—rationale and benefits. N Engl J Med 366:1051–1056PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chiang L, Chui CH, Low Y, Jacobsen AS (2011) Perforation: a rare complication of choledochal cysts in children. Pediatr Surg Int 27:823–827PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Flin R, OCP, Crichton M (2009) Safety at the sharp end: a guide to non-technical skills. Ashgate Publishing Ltd, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fried GM, Feldman LS, Vassiliou MC, Fraser SA, Stanbridge D, Ghitulescu G, Andrew CG (2004) Proving the value of simulation in laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 240:518–525 discussion 525–518PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sachdeva AK, Buyske J, Dunnington GL, Sanfey HA, Mellinger JD, Scott DJ, Satava R, Fried GM, Jacobs LM, Burns KJ (2011) A new paradigm for surgical procedural training. Curr Probl Surg 48:854–968PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Peters JH, Fried GM, Swanstrom LL, Soper NJ, Sillin LF, Schirmer B, Hoffman K (2004) Development and validation of a comprehensive program of education and assessment of the basic fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery. Surgery 135:21–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goova MT, Hollett LA, Tesfay ST, Gala RB, Puzziferri N, Kehdy FJ, Scott DJ (2008) Implementation, construct validity, and benefit of a proficiency-based knot-tying and suturing curriculum. J Surg Educ 65:309–315PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mashaud LB, Arain NA, Hogg DC, Scott DJ (2013) Development, validation, and implementation of a cost-effective intermediate-level proficiency-based knot-tying and suturing curriculum for surgery residents. J Surg Educ 70:193–199PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ritter EM, Scott DJ (2007) Design of a proficiency-based skills training curriculum for the fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery. Surg Innov 14:107–112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ericsson KA (2004) Deliberate practice and the acquisition and maintenance of expert performance in medicine and related domains. Acad Med 79:S70–S81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stefanidis D (2010) Optimal acquisition and assessment of proficiency on simulators in surgery. Surg Clin North Am 90:475–489PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dimitrios Stefanidis
    • 1
  • Harsh Grewal
    • 2
  • John T. Paige
    • 3
  • James R. Korndorffer
    • 4
  • Daniel J. Scott
    • 5
  • Dmitry Nepomnayshy
    • 6
  • David A. Edelman
    • 7
  • Chris Sievers
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Surgery and Carolinas Simulation Center, Carolinas HealthCare SystemUniversity of North Carolina CharlotteCharlotteUSA
  2. 2.Department of Surgery, School of MedicineTemple UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryLSU Health New Orleans School of MedicineNew OrleansUSA
  4. 4.Department of SurgeryTulane University Health Sciences CenterNew OrleansUSA
  5. 5.Department of SurgeryUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasUSA
  6. 6.Department of General Surgery, TUFTS Medical SchoolLahey ClinicBostonUSA
  7. 7.Department of SurgeryWayne State UniversityDetroitUSA

Personalised recommendations