• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer
The Association for Surgical Education

The Association for Surgical Education

Impacting Surgical Education Globally

  • About
    • By-Laws
    • Contact the ASE
    • Leadership
    • Past Presidents
    • Standing Committees
    • Global Surgical Education-Journal of the ASE
    • ASE Strategic Plan 2023-2026
  • Join!
  • Meeting
    • Annual Meeting Information
    • ASE Fall Meeting & Courses
    • Call For Abstracts
      • Scientific Sessions
      • Candlelight Session
      • Multi-Institutional Research Submissions
      • Thinking Out of the Box
      • Workshop and Panel Submissions
    • Institutional Members & Sponsors
      • 2024 ASE Institutional Members and Sponsors
    • Exhibits and Commercial Promotion Opportunities
      • 2024 ASE Industry, Foundation and Society Sponsors
      • 2024 Surgical Education Week Exhibitors
    • Meetings Archives
    • Media Gallery
  • Awards & Programs
    • Academy of Clerkship Directors
    • Academic Program Administrator Certification in Surgery
    • 2023-2024 Association for Surgical Education Curriculum in Education Innovation and Teaching (ASCENT)
    • ASE/APDS: Collaborative Grant Initiative
    • Education Awards
    • Multi-Institutional Research Grant
    • ASE DEI Underrepresented in Medicine (URiM) Scholarship Application
    • Surgical Education and Leadership Fellowship (SELF)
    • Surgical Education Research Fellowship (SERF)
      • Surgical Education Research Fellowship Graduates
    • Visiting Scholar Fellowship
    • Ethics of Surgery Fellowship (EthoS)
  • Foundation
    • Donate Now!
    • Foundation Board
    • Honoring Our Surgical Education Mentors and Educators
    • The ASE Foundation: Building for the Future – Donors
    • Deb DaRosa Scholarship Application
    • Dr. Debra DaRosa Career Development Scholarship – Donors
    • CESERT Pyramid Grant Application
    • Spotlight on CESERT Pyramid Grant Awardees!
    • Newsletter
    • Annual Report
    • Review Committee
    • Grants Awarded
    • Corporate Partners
  • Resources
    • Policy for Conducting Survey Research of ASE Members
    • Nonphysician Professional Educator
    • Educational Materials
    • Collaborative Curricula
    • Getting Started in Surgical Education Research
    • Surgical Education Research Modules
    • Surgical Education Research Webinar Series
    • Podcasts
    • Teaching Modules
    • ASE CoSEF Peer Engagement for Education Research Success Webinar Series
  • ATLAS
  • Donate
  • Login

Annual Meeting 2018 Presentations

C2A - 09: INTEGRATED THORACIC RESIDENTS: PART OF THE FAMILY OR THE UGLY DUCKLING?
Charles Keilin1, Rishindra M Reddy2, Niki Matusko2, Gurjit Sandhu2; 1University of Michigan Medical School, 2Michigan Medicine, Department of Surgery

 

Purpose: Integrated thoracic surgery residency (I6) programs began in 2007 to attract more trainees to thoracic surgery. Similar to other integrated programs, I6 curricula include broad general surgery (GS) requirements. We aim to better understand GS faculty and resident perceptions of I6 residents.

Methods: An anonymous, web-based survey was developed and distributed to GS faculty and residents at the 16 institutions with integrated programs in plastic, vascular and thoracic surgery. Respondents were asked about their perceptions of I6 residents. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact test and qualitative content analysis of free text responses were used to analyze the data.

Results: 43 faculty and 42 residents representing 3 programs completed the survey. The response rates are estimated at 36.1% and 24.6% for faculty and residents, respectively. 72.1% of faculty indicated that GS rotations are valuable for I6 residents. 70% of faculty believe I6 residents put a lot of effort into their GS rotations, while 50% of GS residents feel I6 residents put less effort into GS (p = 0.078).  When assessing for qualitative themes arising from commentary, GS residents believe I6 residents are not as committed to GS, which can interfere with their educational experiences. Specific residents’ responses include: “Not always invested in the patient care.  Sometimes just there to check a box,” and “They are nice people but they take our cases and negatively impact my experience.” 95.4% of GS faculty say they hold all residents equally accountable; conversely, only 52.4% of GS residents agree (p < 0.01). Qualitative analysis of responses corroborates this perception: “They sometimes get the short end of the stick, either [because] of assignments by the chief, lack of initiative on the part of the resident, or both.” Finally, 69.8% of faculty believe they treat all residents the same, while 45.2% of residents feel there is bias (p = 0.078).

Conclusions: The advent of the I6 program has affected both thoracic and GS training. There are notable differences in how GS faculty and residents perceive their interactions with I6 residents. It is necessary to further explore these interactions to optimize the educational experience for all.

Footer

Contact the ASE

11300 W. Olympic Blvd
Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90064 USA
(310) 215-1226
[email protected]

Follow ASE

  • LinkedIn
  • X

Advanced Training in Laparoscopic Suturing

The Official Journal of the Association for Surgical Education

Follow GSE on X

  • X