Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
AI
The Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) has increased its influence and membership, currently supporting 2,200 surgical trainees across the UK and Ireland. This article highlights ASiT's role in promoting high standards in surgical training, providing educational opportunities, and developing a national mentoring scheme for trainees, aimed at enhancing their professional development and leadership skills.
International journal of surgery (London, England), 2013
The Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) is a professional body and registered charity working to promote excellence in surgical training for the benefit of junior doctors and patients alike. With a membership of over 2000 surgical trainees from all ten surgical specialities, the association provides support at both regional and national levels throughout the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. Originally founded in 1976, ASiT is independent of the National Health Service (NHS), Surgical Royal Colleges, and specialty associations. The 2013 Annual Conference in Manchester brought together over 700 delegates for an educational weekend programme with expert guest speakers. Cutting edge clinical updates were complimented by debates on current training in surgery and focussed parallel sessions. The weekend started with 13 pre-conference courses covering a diverse range of topics including laparoscopic skills, ultrasound for surgeons, surgical drawing, core skills in neurosurgery and a masterclass in journal club. A record number of 1458 abstract submissions were received and those successful competed for 22 awards representing nearly £4000 in trainee prizes and bursaries. As the only national surgical trainee meeting for all specialties, ASiT continues to grow and we look forward to an even larger and more successful international conference next year.
International journal of surgery (London, England), 2012
In the past decade surgical training in the United Kingdom (UK) has seen radical overhaul with the introduction of formal training curricula, competency based assessment, and a new Core Surgical Training programme. Despite this, and in common with many other countries, numerous threats remain to sustaining high-quality surgical training and education in the modern working environment. These include service delivery pressures and the reduction in working hours. There are numerous areas for potential improvement and dissemination of best training practice, from incentivising training within the National Health Service (NHS) through top-down government initiatives, to individualised information and feedback for trainees at the front-line. This document sets out the current structure of surgical training in the UK, and describes the contribution to the current debate by the Association of Surgeons in Training. Highlighting areas for improvement at national, regional, local and individual levels, the Association proposes 34 action points to enhance surgical training and education. Adoption of these will ensure future practice continues to improve on, and learn from, the longstanding history of training provided under the guidance of the Royal Surgical Colleges. a On behalf of the Association of Surgeons in Training Council.
Training in surgical disciplines in the United Kingdom has undergone tremendous change over the past two decades. The introduction of specialist training programmes, working time directives, quality ratings and a drive toward ambulatory and minimal access surgery have led to challenges with respect to training and service commitments of healthcare professionals. A structured and centralised training system was introduced, with the concept of core followed by specialty-specific progression, in an openly competitive manner. Within this system is the need to commence training on simulation models, and to demonstrate proficiency prior to performance of tasks on patients. This should be underpinned by objective measures such as video or dexterity-based tools. There is also a clear need to provide personal, professional and leadership development in the form of mentorship and appraisal systems. Though continuing to develop, the profession must be mindful of current and future advances to ensure the delivery of surgeons for the future who aspire toward excellence.
ANZ Journal of Surgery, 2009
ANZ Journal of Surgery, 2009
The aim of a surgical residency program is to produce competent professionals in a safe and pedagogically efficient environment. For many years, there has been an overemphasis on technical attributes as the fundamental competencies of a trained surgeon. With the advent of new frameworks for defining the outcomes of surgical training, such as CanMeds from the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada and the six competencies outlined by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education in USA, there has been a broadening of the focus of surgical training. Although technical proficiency is definitely an important prerequisite for a successful outcome, other qualities such as intellectual abilities, personality and communication skills, and a commitment to practice are important elements in the profile of a competent surgeon. Recently, there is a growing appreciation for the heterogeneity in achievement of technical competence among our trainees, with some residents abl...
ANZ Journal of Surgery, 2002
Clinical and technical skill may not be sufficient to fulfil society's expectations of surgeons. Other skills, which have been well defined in the published literature, include those of the professional, communicator, collaborator, manager, scholar and health advocate. It is the purpose of this review to explore the current understanding of these different domains and make comment about ways to improve training that will ensure that the surgeon of the future has the opportunity to develop broader expertize.
Published in 2013, the Shape of Training review is an independent review of postgraduate medical training overseen by Professor David Greenaway. This review has set out recommendations for the structure and delivery of training for the next 30 years, including a framework and timescale for this reconfiguration. There is a wide range of key themes, listed in Table 1. The changes proposed in its 19 recommendations are far reaching, with implications for both current and future surgical trainees in the UK.
International journal of surgery (London, England), 2012
International Journal of Surgery, 2016
Background: Surgical trainees are expected to demonstrate academic achievement in order to obtain their certificate of completion of training (CCT). These standards are set by the Joint Committee on Surgical Training (JCST) and specialty advisory committees (SAC). The standards are not equivalent across all surgical specialties and recognise different achievements as evidence. They do not recognise changes in models of research and focus on outcomes rather than process. The Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) and National Research Collaborative (NRC) set out to develop progressive, consistent and flexible evidence set for academic requirements at CCT. Methods: A modified-Delphi approach was used. An expert group consisting of representatives from the ASiT and the NRC undertook iterative review of a document proposing changes to requirements. This was circulated amongst wider stakeholders. After ten iterations, an open meeting was held to discuss these proposals. Voting on statements was performed using a 5-point Likert Scale. Each statement was voted on twice, with 80% of votes in agreement meaning the statement was approved. The results of this vote were used to propose core and optional academic requirements for CCT. Results: Online discussion concluded after ten rounds. At the consensus meeting, statements were voted on by 25 delegates from across surgical specialties and training-grades. The group strongly favoured acquisition of 'Good Clinical Practice' training and research methodology training as CCT requirements. The group agreed that higher degrees, publications in any author position (including collaborative authorship), recruiting patients to a study or multicentre audit and presentation at a national or international meeting could be used as evidence for the purpose of CCT. The group agreed on two essential 'core' requirements (GCP and methodology training) and two of a menu of four 'additional' requirements (publication with any authorship position, presentation, recruitment of patients to a multicentre study and completion of a higher degree), which should be completed in order to attain CCT. Conclusion: This approach has engaged stakeholders to produce a progressive set of academic requirements for CCT, which are applicable across surgical specialties. Flexibility in requirements whilst retaining a high standard of evidence is desirable.
BMJ: British medical journal
ANZ Journal of Surgery, 2009
International Journal of Surgery, 2019
Annals of Surgery, 2017
S urgical education has traditionally focused on the surgical clerkship during medical school and general surgery residency. Over the past 20 years, however, there has been a tremendous evolution in this very important mission of academic surgery. The most dramatic of these changes affecting resident training began with the implementation of residency work-hour restrictions in 2003. Changes in assessment of competency of the surgical trainee, challenges in providing resident autonomy in the era of reporting surgical outcomes and RVU-based compensation, and the increased emphasis on fellowship training, including integrated training programs or early specialization, have dramatically affected the training of surgical residents. Undergraduate medical education in surgery has been affected as medical schools have shortened the time spent on surgical rotations, while students are being asked to make decisions regarding choice of specialty earlier to consider new integrated specialty tracks. On a positive note, after selection of surgical specialty, many schools have an increased emphasis on preparation for residency training with ''surgical boot camps.'' Maintenance of certification of trained specialists has added to the administrative burden of surgeons already at risk for burnout. Finally, questions as to how to introduce new technology, or to retrain or retool practicing surgeons, have yet to be answered. Thus, one can safely conclude that the changes in surgical education are now extending throughout the lifetime of a surgeon. Despite these extensive changes and challenges existing at all levels, surgical education has only been the focus of the American Surgical Association (ASA) Presidential Forum twice over the past 20 years. In 2004, 1 with a report that preceded the presentation of the ASA ''Blue Ribbon'' panel, 2 and in 2012, with a review of the issues in general surgery resident training. 3 It is the purpose of this panel to provide an overview of surgical education from medical school until the late stages of a surgeon's practice. To lead the discussions, we have called on leading experts and innovators in surgical education from both the United States and the United Kingdom, and also members of the leadership of the American Board of Surgery (ABS).
Health service reconfigurations may result in increasing numbers of minor surgical procedures migrating from secondary care in hospitals to primary care in the community. Procedures may be performed by General Practitioners with a specialist interest in Surgery, or secondary care Surgeons who are sub-contracted to perform procedures in the community. Surgical training in such procedures, which are currently hospital based, may therefore be adversely affected unless surgical training also takes advantage of these opportunities. There is potential for surgical trainees to benefit from training in the community setting. ASiT supports the development of formal surgical training in the community setting for junior surgical trainees, providing high standards of patient care and training provision are ensured. Anticipated problems relating to the migration of surgical services to the community relate to the availability and quality assurance of training opportunities in primary care, its funding, including exposure to issues of indemnity cover for trainees, and also the release of surgical trainees from hospital duties in order to attend these training opportunities. These consensus recommendations set out a framework through which both patient care and training remain at the forefront of these continued service reconfigurations.
Postgraduate Medical Journal, 2021
Postgraduate training in surgical specialties is one of the longest training programmes in the medical field. Most of the surgical training programmes require 5–6 years of postgraduate training to become qualified. This is usually followed by 1–2 years of fellowship training in a subspecialised interest. This has been the case for the last 20–30 years with no significant change. The surgical practice is transforming quickly due to the advances in medical technology. This transformation is not matched in the postgraduate training, there is minimal exposure to the new technological advances in early years of postgraduate training. The current postgraduate training in surgical specialties is not fit for the future. Early exposure to robotic and artificial intelligence technologies is required. To achieve this, a significant transformation of surgical training is necessary, which requires a new vision and involves significant investment. We discuss the need for this transformation in th...
Journal of Surgical Sciences, 2019
not available Journal of Surgical Sciences (2017) Vol. 21 (1) :2-4
The Bulletin of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2018
Surgical skills training is an important aspect of both undergraduate and post-graduate medical education.1 Unfortunately, surgical skills training for medical students and foundation year doctors can be variable and dependent on particular surgical rotations. Medical students have reported receiving negative comments in theatre, being made to feel unwelcome and having a lack of structured teaching during theatre sessions.2,3 Although the focus of theatre lists must be patient-centred, current training schemes allow less time for clinical exposure, meaning that every clinical encounter must be considered a training opportunity. This is both the responsibility of the surgical team and of medical students and junior doctors; students who are encouraged to scrub, be involved and are better prepared are more likely to attend theatre again.4 Exposure and experiences within surgical firms are also significant factors in determining the choice of surgery as a career.5,6 They allow not only development of practical skills but also discussion about career and lifestyle.7 Ultimately, the nurturing and attention to training of medical students and junior doctors will ensure that surgery continues to attract excellent candidates.
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2006
The Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, has recently published his recommendations 1 on how the government should respond to the serious criticisms of medical regulation and the General Medical Council made by Dame Janet Smith in her final report of the Shipman Inquiry. 2 In a thoughtful and well-written report, he places the regulation of doctors within the wider set of systems for improving and quality assuring modern practice. Doctoring is at the heart of the healthcare system. Sir Liam's focus throughout is, therefore, on how to make sure that in future everyone in the UK who needs a doctor gets a good doctor. 3 It means that patients should feel they can trust any doctor without even having to think about it, 2 and that doctors themselves would entrust members of their family to any colleague without a moment's hesitation.
Innovative Surgical Sciences, 2019
The first residency programs for surgical training were introduced in Germany in the late 1880s and adopted in 1889 by William Halsted in the United States [Cameron JL. William Stewart Halsted. Our surgical heritage. Ann Surg 1997;225:445–58.]. Since then, surgical education has evolved from a sheer volume of exposure to structured curricula, and at the moment, due to work time restrictions, surgical education is discussed on an international level. The reported effect of limited working hours on operative case volume has been variable [McKendy KM, Watanabe Y, Lee L, Bilgic E, Enani G, Feldman LS, et al. Perioperative feedback in surgical training: a systematic review. Am J Surg 2017;214:117–26.]. Experienced surgeons fear that residents do not have sufficient exposure to standard procedures. This may reduce the residents’ responsibility for the treatment of the patient and even lead to a reduced autonomy at the end of the residency. Surgical education does not only require learning...
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.