Advertisement

Clinical and Translational Oncology

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 517–523 | Cite as

Current situation in gynecological oncology training in Spain: where we are and where we want to go

  • P. Padilla-Iserte
  • L. Minig
  • I. Zapardiel
  • L. Chiva
  • R. Laky
  • J. de Santiago
Research Article

Abstract

Background

It is important to know what a young gynecologic oncologist perceives as a need to achieve a good training in gynecologic oncology.

Objective

This study aims to evaluate the level of training in gynecologic oncology in Spain.

Methods

A Web-based anonymous questionnaire was sent via e-mail to Spanish trainees listed in European Network of Young Gynecological Oncology (ENYGO). The survey was developed in four sections: (1) general training in gynecologic oncology, (2) distribution of current clinical activity, (3) surgical training, and (4) perspective future gynecologic oncology. It contained 51 questions, with multiple-choice answers that had to be answered by the ENYGO members.

Results

The questionnaire was sent to 64 people listed in the ENYGO database. Of these, 37 members responded (response rate of 58%). Overall, more training in surgery is necessary, to perform radical oncological surgeries. It is claimed a sub-specialty recognition, to ensure an equalitarian and homogeneous training.

Keywords

Gynecological cancer Fellowship-training program Gynecologic oncologists 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Spanish Group of Young Gynecologic Oncologists (JGO), the European Network of Young Gynecological Oncologist (ENYGO), and the Spanish Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (SEGO).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. None of the authors has any relationship or funding received for this work from.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

For this type of study, formal consent is not required. This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Averette HE, Wrennick A, Angioli R. History of gynecologic oncology subspecialty. Surg Clin North Am. 2001;81:747–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vernooij F, Heintz P, Witteveen E, van der Graaf Y. The outcomes of ovarian cancer treatment are better when provided by gynecologic oncologists and in specialized hospitals: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;105:801–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fung-Kee-Fung M, Kennedy EB, Biagi J, Colgan T, D’Souza D, Elit LM, et al. The optimal organization of gynecologic oncology services: a systematic review. Curr Oncol. 2015;22:e282–93.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gershenson DM. The future of gynecologic oncology: are we headed for super-specialization? Gynecol Oncol. 2011;122:3–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cibula D, Kesic V. Surgical education and training in gynecologic oncology I: European perspective. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;114:S52–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gultekin M, Dursun P, Vranes B, Laky R, Bossart M, Grabowski JP, et al. Gynecologic oncology training systems in Europe: a report from the European network of young gynaecological oncologists. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011;21:1500–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Manchanda R, Halaska MJ, Piek JM, Grabowski JP, Haidopoulos D, Zapardiel I, et al. The need for more workshops in laparoscopic surgery and surgical anatomy for European gynaecological oncology trainees: a survey by the European Network of Young Gynaecological Oncologists. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013;23:1127–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cohn DE, Roney JD, O’Malley DM, Valmadre S. Residents’ perspectives on surgical training and the resident-fellow relationship: comparing residency programs with and without gynecological oncology fellowships. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008;18:199–204.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Templeton A. Subspecialty training and academic careers. Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 1999;13:423–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Minig L, Padilla-Iserte P, Zorrero C. The relevance of gynecologic oncologists to provide high-quality of care to women with gynecological cancer. Front Oncol. 2016;14(5):308.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Manchanda R, Godfrey M, Wong-Taylor LA, Halaska MJ, Burnell M, Grabowski JP, et al. The need for accredited training in gynaecological oncology: a report from the European Network of Young Gynaecological Oncologists (ENYGO). Ann Oncol. 2013;24:944–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dodge JE, Chiu HH, Fung S, Rosen BP. Multicentre study on factors affecting the gynaecologic oncology career choice of canadian residents in obstetrics and gynaecology. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2010;32:780–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Education and training in Surgery: ESGO Survey (European) presented by Dr L. Chiva. In: 19th International meeting of the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (Nice, France, October 2015).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Reznick RK, MacRae H. Teaching surgical skills–changes in the wind. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:2664–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Goff BA. Changing the paradigm in surgical education. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112:328–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Federación de Sociedades Españolas de Oncología (FESEO) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Gynecologic OncologyHospital Universitario La FeValenciaSpain
  2. 2.Gynecologic Oncology UnitLa Paz University HospitalMadridSpain
  3. 3.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyClinica Universidad de NavarraPamplonaSpain
  4. 4.Division of GynecologyMedical University GrazGrazAustria
  5. 5.Department of Gynecology OncologyMD Anderson Cancer Center MadridMadridSpain
  6. 6.Department of GynecologyValencian Institute of Oncology (IVO)ValenciaSpain

Personalised recommendations