Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

An Objective Assessment of the Surgical Trainee in an Urban Trauma Unit in South Africa: A Pilot Study

  • Original Scientific Report
  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Surgical outcomes are provider specific. This prospective audit describes the surgical activity of five general surgery residents on their trauma surgery rotation. It was hypothesized that the operating surgical trainee is an independent risk factor for adverse outcomes following major trauma.

Materials and methods

This is a prospective cohort study. All patients admitted, over a 6-month period (August 2014–January 2015), following trauma requiring a major operation performed by a surgical trainee at Groote Schuur Hospital’s trauma unit in South Africa were included. Multiple logistic regression models were built to compare risk-adjusted surgical outcomes between trainees. The primary outcome measure was major in-hospital complications.

Results

A total of 320 major operations involving 341 procedures were included. The mean age was 28.49 years (range 13–64), 97.2 % were male with a median ISS of 9 (IQR 1–41). Mechanism of injury was penetrating in 93.42 % of cases of which 51.86 % were gunshot injuries. Surgeon A consistently had the lowest risk-adjusted outcomes and was used as the reference for all outcomes in the regression models. Surgeon B, D, and E had statistically significant higher rates of major in-hospital complications than Surgeon A and C, after adjusting for multiple confounders. The final model used to calculate the risk estimates for the primary outcome had a ROC of 0.8649.

Conclusion

Risk-adjusted surgical outcomes vary by operating surgical trainee. The analysis thereof can add value to the objective assessment of a surgical trainee.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zargaran E, Schuurman N, Nicol AJ et al (2014) The electronic Trauma Health Record: design and usability of a novel tablet-based tool for trauma care and injury surveillance in low resource settings. J Am Coll Surg 218(1):41–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, National VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program et al (1998) The Department of Veterans Affairs’ NSQIP: the first national, validated, outcome-based, risk-adjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. Ann Surg 228(4):491–507

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB, Birkmeyer NJ (2004) Measuring the quality of surgical care: structure, process, or outcomes? J Am Coll Surg 198(4):626–632

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. O’Connor GT, Plume SK, Olmstead EM, The Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group et al (1996) A regional intervention to improve the hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass graft surgery. JAMA 275(11):841–846

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gifford E, Kim DY, Nguyen A et al (2016) The effect of residents as teaching assistants on operative time in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 211(1):288–293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Iannuzzi JC, Chandra A, Rickles AS et al (2013) Resident involvement is associated with worse outcomes after major lower extremity amputation. J Vasc Surg 58(3):827–831

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Tsigonis AM, Landercasper J, Al-Hamadani M et al (2015) Are breast cancer outcomes compromised by general surgical resident participation in the operation? J Surg Educ 72(6):1109–1111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Meyerson SL, Teitelbaum EN, George BC et al (2014) Defining the autonomy gap: when expectations do not meet reality in the operating room. J Surg Educ 71(6):e64–e72

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Patel M, Bhullar JS, Subhas G et al (2015) Present status of autonomy in surgical residency: a program director’s perspective. Am Surg 81(8):786–790

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sachs TE, Pawlik TM (2015) See one, do one, and teach none: resident experience as a teaching assistant. J Surg Res 195(1):44–51

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML et al (2009) The Clavien–Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 250(2):187–196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Haider AH, Hashmi G, Zafar SN et al (2014) Developing best practices to study trauma outcomes in large databases: an evidence-based approach to determine the best mortality risk adjustment model. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 76(4):1061–1069

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pearse RM, Rhodes A, Moreno R et al (2011) EuSOS: European Surgical Outcomes Study. Eur J Anaesthesiol 28(6):454–456

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Meara JG, Leather AJ, Hagander L et al (2015) Global surgery 2030: evidence and solutions for achieving health, welfare, and economic development. Lancet 386(9993):569–624

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Haynes AB, Regenbogen SE, Weiser TG et al (2011) Surgical outcome measurement for a global patient population: validation of the Surgical Apgar Score in 8 countries. Surgery 149(4):519–524

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bickler S, Ozgediz D, Gosselin R et al (2010) Key concepts for estimating the burden of surgical conditions and the unmet need for surgical care. World J Surg 34(3):374–380. doi:10.1007/s00268-009-0261-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR et al (2009) A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med 360(5):491–499

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pearse RM, Moreno RP, Bauer P et al (2012) Mortality after surgery in Europe: a 7 day cohort study. Lancet 380(9847):1059–1065

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Gonzalez AA, Dimick JB, Birkmeyer JD et al (2014) Understanding the volume-outcome effect in cardiovascular surgery: the role of failure to rescue. JAMA Surg 149(2):119–123

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Reames BN, Ghaferi AA, Birkmeyer JD (2014) Hospital volume and operative mortality in the modern era. Ann Surg 260(2):244–251

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. McCulloch P, Nagendran M, Campbell WB et al (2013) Strategies to reduce variation in the use of surgery. Lancet 382(9898):1130–1139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Revels SL, Wong SL, Banerjee M et al (2014) Differences in perioperative care at low- and high-mortality hospitals with cancer surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 21(7):2129–2135

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Donabedian A (2005) Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Q 83(4):691–729

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard Trafford Spence.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No conflicts of interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Spence, R.T., Zargaran, E., Hameed, M. et al. An Objective Assessment of the Surgical Trainee in an Urban Trauma Unit in South Africa: A Pilot Study. World J Surg 40, 1815–1822 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3503-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3503-4

Keywords

Navigation