Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Surgical Training and Learner Well-Being: Report of a Survey of General Surgery and Other Surgical Specialty Educators - PubMed (original) (raw)

. 2020 Dec;231(6):613-626.

doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2020.08.766. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

Kathryn Spanknebel 2, Steven C Stain 3, Mohsen M Shabahang 4, Jeffrey B Matthews 5, Haile T Debas 6, Alisa Nagler 7, Patrice Gabler Blair 7, Timothy J Eberlein 8, Diana L Farmer 9, Richard Sloane 10, L D Britt 11, Ajit K Sachdeva 7

Affiliations

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Surgical Training and Learner Well-Being: Report of a Survey of General Surgery and Other Surgical Specialty Educators

E Christopher Ellison et al. J Am Coll Surg. 2020 Dec.

Abstract

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the delivery of surgical services. The purpose of this communication was to report the impact of the pandemic on surgical training and learner well-being and to document adaptations made by surgery departments.

Study design: A 37-item survey was distributed to educational leaders in general surgery and other surgical specialty training programs. It included both closed- and open-ended questions and the self-reported stages of GME during the COVID-19 pandemic, as defined by the ACGME. Statistical associations for items with stage were assessed using categorical analysis.

Results: The response rate was 21% (472 of 2,196). US stage distribution (n = 447) was as follows: stage 1, 22%; stage 2, 48%; and stage 3, 30%. Impact on clinical education significantly increased by stage, with severe reductions in nonemergency operations (73% and 86% vs 98%) and emergency operations (8% and 16% vs 34%). Variable effects were reported on minimal expected case numbers across all stages. Reductions were reported in outpatient experience (83%), in-hospital experience (70%), and outside rotations (57%). Increases in ICU rotations were reported with advancing stage (7% and 13% vs 37%). Severity of impact on didactic education increased with stage (14% and 30% vs 46%). Virtual conferences were adopted by 97% across all stages. Severity of impact on learner well-being increased by stage-physical safety (6% and 9% vs 31%), physical health (0% and 7% vs 17%), and emotional health (11% and 24% vs 42%). Regardless of stage, most but not all made adaptations to support trainees' well-being.

Conclusions: The pandemic adversely impacted surgical training and the well-being of learners across all surgical specialties proportional to increasing ACGME stage. There is a need to develop education disaster plans to support technical competency and learner well-being. Careful assessment for program advancement will also be necessary. The experience during this pandemic shows that virtual learning and telemedicine will have a considerable impact on the future of surgical education.

Copyright © 2020 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

None

Graphical abstract

Figure 1

Figure 1

ACGME stage and regional distribution. Stage 1(n = 98 [22%]): business as usual; stage 2 (n = 214 [48%]): increasing but manageable; stage 3 (n = 135 [30%]): crossing the threshold. There were 447 respondents from the US. The graph shows the distribution of stage by region. There were 15 respondents from other locations—9 from Canada and 6 from other locations outside the US. In addition, 10 respondents skipped the question on location of primary institution and stage.

Figure 2

Figure 2

Proportion of respondents reporting severe reductions in nonemergency and emergency operative volume. Nonemergency operative volume, stage 1 vs stage 3: odds ratio (OR) 0.43; p < 0.0001; 95% CI, 0.010 to 0.189; stage 2 vs stage 3: OR 0.103; p = 0.0022; 95% CI, 0.024 to 0.441. Emergency operative volume, stage 1 vs stage 3: OR 0.175; p = 0.001; 95% CI, 0.075 to 0.413; stage 2 vs stage 3: OR 0.372; p = 0.0003; 95% CI, 0.218 to 0.632.

Figure 3

Figure 3

Severe impact on didactic education by ACGME stage. Stage 1: business as usual; stage 2: increasing but manageable; stage 3: crossing the threshold. Stage 1 vs stage 3: OR 0.192; p < 0.0001; 95% CI, 0.095 to 0.388; stage 2 vs stage 3: OR 0.507; p = 0.0041; 95% CI, 0.319 to 0.806.

Comment in

References

    1. Hoxsey R., Smith M., Miller J., Nolan T. Surviving disaster: assessment of obstetrics and gynecology training at Louisiana State University-New Orleans before and after Hurricane Katrina. Am J Med Sci. 2008;336:151–155. -PubMed
    1. Kahn M., Sachs B. Crises and turnaround management: lessons learned from recovery of New Orleans and Tulane University following Hurricane Katrina. Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2018;9(4) -PMC -PubMed
    1. Brindle ME, Gawande A. Managing COVID-19 in surgical systems. Ann Surg 272(1):e1–e2. -PMC -PubMed
    1. Calhoun K.E., Yale L.A., Whipple M.E. The impact of COVID-19 on medical student surgical education: implementing extreme pandemic response measures in a widely distributed surgical clerkship experience. Am J Surg. 2020;220:44–47. -PMC -PubMed
    1. Zheng J., Hundeyin M., He K. General surgery chief residents’ perspective on surgical education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Surgery. 2020;168:222–225. -PMC -PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources