Impact of performance in a mandatory postgraduate surgical examination on selection into specialty training

Performance in Irish Selection and Future Performance in Surgical Training

Importance

Selection processes for surgical training should aim to identify candidates who will become competent independent practitioners and should aspire to high standards of reliability and validity.

Objective

To determine the association between measured candidate factors at the time of an Irish selection and assessment outcomes in surgical training, examined via rate of progression to Higher Specialist Training (HST), attrition rates, and performance as assessed through a multimodal framework of workplace-based and simulation-based assessments.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective observational cohort study included data from all successful applicants to the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) national Core Surgical Training (CST) program. Participants included all trainees recruited to dedicated postgraduate surgical training from 2016 to 2020. These data were analyzed from July 11, 2016, through July 10, 2022.

Exposures

Selection decisions were based on a composite score that was derived from technical aptitude assessments, undergraduate academic performance, and a 4-station multiple mini-interview.

Main outcomes and measures

Assessment data, attrition rates, and rates of progression to HST were recorded for each trainee. CST performance was assessed using workplace-based and simulation-based technical and nontechnical skill assessments. Potential associations between selection and assessment measures were explored using Pearson correlation, logistic regression, and multiple linear-regression analyses.

Results

Data were available for 303 trainees. Composite scores were positively associated with progression to HST (odds ratio [OR], 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05-1.13). There was a weak positive correlation, ranging from 0.23 to 0.34, between scores and performance across all CST assessments. Multivariable linear regression analysis showed technical aptitude scores at application were associated with future operative performance assessment scores, both in the workplace (β = 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14-0.48) and simulated environments (β = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.33-0.81). There was evidence that the interpersonal skills interview station was associated with future performance in simulated communication skill assessments (β = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.22-0.87).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, performance at the time of Irish national selection, measured across technical and nontechnical domains in a multimodal fashion, was associated with future performance in the workplace and in simulated environments. Future studies will be required to explore the consequential validity of selection, including potential unintended effects of selection and ranking on candidate performance.

Re-examining single-moment-in-time high-stakes examinations in specialist training: A critical narrative review

In this critical narrative review, we challenge the belief that single-moment-in-time high-stakes examinations (SMITHSEx) are an essential component of contemporary specialist training. We explore the arguments both for and against SMITHSEx, examine potential alternatives, and discuss the barriers to change.SMITHSEx are viewed as the "gold standard" assessment of competence but focus excessively on knowledge assessment rather than capturing essential competencies required for safe and competent workplace performance. Contrary to popular belief, regulatory bodies do not mandate SMITHSEx in specialist training. Though acting as significant drivers of learning and professional identity formation, these attributes are not exclusive to SMITHSEx.Skills such as crisis management, procedural skills, professionalism, communication, collaboration, lifelong learning, reflection on practice, and judgement are often overlooked by SMITHSEx. Their inherent design raises questions about the validity and objectivity of SMITHSEx as a measure of workplace competence. They have a detrimental impact on trainee well-being, contributing to burnout and differential attainment.Alternatives to SMITHSEx include continuous low-stakes assessments throughout training, ongoing evaluation of competence in the workplace, and competency-based medical education (CBME) concepts. These aim to provide a more comprehensive and context-specific assessment of trainees' competence while also improving trainee welfare.Specialist training colleges should evolve from exam providers to holistic education sources. Assessments should emphasise essential practical knowledge over trivia, align with clinical practice, aid learning, and be part of a diverse toolkit. Eliminating SMITHSEx from specialist training will foster a competency-based approach, benefiting future medical professionals' well-being and success.

Establishing the predictive validity of the intercollegiate membership of the Royal Colleges of surgeons written examination: MRCS Part A

Successful completion of the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons (MRCS) examination is mandatory for surgical trainees entering higher specialist training in the United Kingdom. Despite its international reputation, and the value placed on the examination in surgical training, there has been little evidence of its predictive validity until recently. In this review, we present a summary of findings of four recent Intercollegiate studies assessing the predictive validity of the MRCS Part A (written) examination. Data from all four studies showed statistically significant positive correlations between the MRCS Part A and other written examinations taken by surgical trainees over the course of their education. The studies summarised in this review provide compelling evidence for the predictive validity of this gatekeeping examination. This review will be of interest to trainees, training institutions and the Royal Colleges given the value placed on the examination by surgical training programmes.

Establishing the predictive validity of the intercollegiate membership of the Royal Colleges of surgeons written examination: MRCS part B

The Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons (MRCS) is a high-stakes postgraduate examination taken by thousands of surgical trainees worldwide every year. The MRCS is a challenging assessment, highly regarded by surgical training programmes and valued as a gatekeeper to the surgical profession. The examination is taken at considerable personal, social and financial cost to surgical trainees, and failure has significant implications for career progression. Given the value placed on MRCS, it must be a reliable and valid assessment of the knowledge and skills of early-career surgeons. Our first article 'Establishing the Predictive Validity of the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons Written Examination: MRCS Part A' discussed the principles of assessment reliability and validity and outlined the mounting evidence supporting the predictive validity of the MRCS Part A (the multiple-choice questionnaire component of the examination). This, the second article in the series discusses six recently published studies investigating the predictive validity of the MRCS Part B (the clinical component of the examination). All national longitudinal cohort studies reviewed have demonstrated significant correlations between MRCS Part B and other assessments taken during the UK surgical training pathway, supporting the predictive validity of MRCS Part B. This review will be of interest to trainees, trainers and Royal Colleges given the value placed on the examination by surgical training programmes.

A cross-sectional study examining MRCS performance by core surgical training location

BACKGROUND

In the UK, core surgical training (CST) is the first specialty experience that early-career surgeons receive but training differs significantly across CST deaneries. To identify the impact these differences have on trainee performance, we assessed whether success at the Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examinations is associated with CST deanery.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of UK trainees in CST who attempted MRCS between 2014 and 2020 (n = 1104). Chi-squared tests examined associations between locality and first-attempt MRCS performance. Multivariate logistic regression models identified the likelihood of MRCS success depending on CST deanery.

RESULTS

MRCS Part A and Part B pass rates were associated with CST deanery (p < 0.001 and p = 0.013, respectively). Candidates that trained in Thames Valley (Odds Ratio [OR] 2.52 (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.00-6.42), North Central and East London (OR 2.37 [95% CI 1.04-5.40]) or South London (OR 2.36 [95% CI 1.09-5.10]) were each more than twice as likely to pass MRCS Part A at first attempt. Trainees from North Central and East London were more than ten times more likely to pass MRCS Part B at first attempt (OR 10.59 [95% CI 1.23-51.00]). However, 68% of candidates attempted Part A prior to CST and 48% attempted Part B before or during the first year of CST.

CONCLUSION

MRCS performance is associated with CST deanery; however, many candidates passed the exam with little or any CST experience suggesting that some deaneries attract high academic performers. MRCS performance is therefore not a suitable marker of CST training quality.

Differential attainment at MRCS according to gender, ethnicity, age and socioeconomic factors: a retrospective cohort study

Objective

A recent independent review on diversity and inclusivity highlighted concerns that barriers to surgical career progression exist for some groups of individuals and not others. Group-level differences in performance at the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons (MRCS) examinations have been identified but are yet to be investigated. We aimed to characterise the relationship between sociodemographic differences and performance at MRCS.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting

Secondary care.

Participants

All UK MRCS candidates attempting Part A (n = 5780) and Part B (n = 2600) between 2013 and 2019 with linked sociodemographic data in the UK Medical Education Database (https://www.ukmed.ac.uk).

Main outcome measures

Chi-square tests established univariate associations with MRCS performance. Multiple logistic regression identified independent predictors of success, adjusted for medical school performance.

Results

Statistically significant differences in MRCS pass rates were found according to gender, ethnicity, age, graduate status, educational background and socioeconomic status (all p < 0.05). After adjusting for prior academic attainment, being male (odds ratio [OR] 2.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.87–2.92) or a non-graduate (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.44–2.74) were independent predictors of MRCS Part A success and being a non-graduate (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.15–2.71) and having attended a fee-paying school (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.08–2.10) were independent predictors of Part B success. Black and minority ethnic groups were significantly less likely to pass MRCS Part B at their first attempt (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.18–0.92 for Black candidates and OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.35–0.69 for Asian candidates) compared to White candidates.

Conclusions

There is significant group-level differential attainment at MRCS, likely to represent the accumulation of privilege and disadvantage experienced by individuals throughout their education and training. Those leading surgical education now have a responsibility to identify and address the causes of these attainment differences.

Does performance at the intercollegiate Membership of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons (MRCS) examination vary according to UK medical school and course type? A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The knowledge, skills and behaviours required of new UK medical graduates are the same but how these are achieved differs given medical schools vary in their mission, curricula and pedagogy. Medical school differences seem to influence performance on postgraduate assessments. To date, the relationship between medical schools, course types and performance at the Membership of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons examination (MRCS) has not been investigated. Understanding this relationship is vital to achieving alignment across undergraduate and postgraduate training, learning and assessment values.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective longitudinal cohort study of UK medical graduates who attempted MRCS Part A (n=9730) and MRCS Part B (n=4645) between 2007 and 2017, using individual-level linked sociodemographic and prior academic attainment data from the UK Medical Education Database.

METHODS

We studied MRCS performance across all UK medical schools and examined relationships between potential predictors and MRCS performance using χ2 analysis. Multivariate logistic regression models identified independent predictors of MRCS success at first attempt.

RESULTS

MRCS pass rates differed significantly between individual medical schools (p<0.001) but not after adjusting for prior A-Level performance. Candidates from courses other than those described as problem-based learning (PBL) were 53% more likely to pass MRCS Part A (OR 1.53 (95% CI 1.25 to 1.87) and 54% more likely to pass Part B (OR 1.54 (1.05 to 2.25)) at first attempt after adjusting for prior academic performance. Attending a Standard-Entry 5-year medicine programme, having no prior degree and attending a Russell Group university were independent predictors of MRCS success in regression models (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

There are significant differences in MRCS performance between medical schools. However, this variation is largely due to individual factors such as academic ability, rather than medical school factors. This study also highlights group level attainment differences that warrant further investigation to ensure equity within medical training.

Does performance at medical school predict success at the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination? A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Identifying predictors of success in postgraduate examinations can help guide the career choices of medical students and may aid early identification of trainees requiring extra support to progress in specialty training. We assessed whether performance on the educational performance measurement (EPM) and situational judgement test (SJT) used for selection into foundation training predicted success at the Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination.

METHODS

This was a longitudinal, cohort study using data from the UK Medical Education Database (https://www.ukmed.ac.uk). UK medical graduates who had attempted Part A (n=2585) and Part B (n=755) of the MRCS between 2014 and 2017 were included. χ² and independent t-tests were used to examine the relationship between medical school performance and sociodemographic factors with first-attempt success at MRCS Part A and B. Multivariate logistic regression was employed to identify independent predictors of MRCS performance.

RESULTS

The odds of passing MRCS increased by 55% for Part A (OR 1.55 (95% CI 1.48 to 1.61)) and 23% for Part B (1.23 (1.14 to 1.32)) for every additional EPM decile point gained. For every point awarded for additional degrees in the EPM, candidates were 20% more likely to pass MRCS Part A (1.20 (1.13 to 1.29)) and 17% more likely to pass Part B (1.17 (1.04 to 1.33)). For every point awarded for publications in the EPM, candidates were 14% more likely to pass MRCS Part A (1.14 (1.01 to 1.28)). SJT score was not a statistically significant independent predictor of MRCS success.

CONCLUSION

This study has demonstrated the EPM's independent predictive power and found that medical school performance deciles are the most significant measure of predicting later success in the MRCS. These findings can be used by medical schools, training boards and workforce planners to inform evidence-based and contemporary selection and assessment strategies.

A cross-sectional study examining the association between MRCS performance and surgeons receiving sanctions against their medical registration

BACKGROUND

Fitness to practice (FtP) investigations by the General Medical Council (GMC) safeguard patients and maintain the integrity of the medical profession. The likelihood of FtP sanctions is influenced by specialty and socio-demographic factors and can be predicted by performance at postgraduate examinations. This is the first study to characterise the prevalence of FtP sanctions in early-career surgeons and to examine the association with performance at the Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination.

METHODS

All UK graduates who attempted MRCS between September 2007-January 2020 were matched to the GMC list of registered medical practitioners. Clinicians who had active FtP sanctions between 28th August 2018 and 28th August 2020 were identified. Data were anonymised by RCS England prior to analysis.

RESULTS

Of 11,660 candidates who attempted MRCS within the study period, only 31 (0.3%) had FtP sanctions between 2018 and 2020. Of these, 12 had active conditions on registration, seven had undertakings and 14 had warnings. There was no statistically significant difference in MRCS performance in either Parts A or B of the examination for those with and those free from FtP sanctions (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In this, the largest study of MRCS candidates to date, the prevalence of active FtP sanctions in early-career surgeons was 0.3%, significantly lower than the prevalence of sanctions across more experienced UK surgeons (0.9%). These data highlight early-career surgeons as a low-risk group for disciplinary action and should reassure patients and medical professionals of the rarity of FtP sanctions.

Cutting edge selection: learning from high reliability organisations for virtual recruitment in surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

National selection for higher surgical training (ST3+) recruitment in the UK is competitive. The process must prioritise patient safety while being credible, impartial and fair. During the COVID-19 pandemic, all face-to-face interviews were cancelled. Selection was based on a controversial isolated self-assessment score with no evidence checking taking place. From 2021, selection will take place entirely online. Although this has cost and time advantages, new challenges emerge.

METHODS

We review surgical selection as it transitions to an online format and suggest validated methods that could be adapted from High Reliability Organisations (HRO).

FINDINGS

Virtual selection methods include video interviewing, online examinations and aptitude testing. These tools have been used in business for many years, but their predictive value in surgery is largely unknown. In healthcare, the established online Multi-Specialty Recruitment Assessment (MSRA) examines generic professional capabilities. Its scope, however, is too limited to be used in isolation. Candidates and interviewers alike may have concerns about the technical aspects of virtual recruitment. The significance of human factors must not be overlooked in the online environment. Surgery can learn from HROs, such as aviation. Pilot and air traffic control selection is integral to ensuring safety. These organisations have already established digital selection methods for psychological aptitude, professional capabilities and manual dexterity.

CONCLUSION

National selection for higher surgical training (ST3+) can learn from HROs, using validated methods to prioritise patient safety while being acceptable to candidates, trainers and health service recruiters.

Performance at medical school selection correlates with success in Part A of the intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination

Medical schools in the UK typically use prior academic attainment and an admissions test (University Clinical Aptitude Test (UCAT), Biomedical Admissions Test (BMAT) or the Graduate Medical School Admissions Test (GAMSAT)) to help select applicants for interview. To justify their use, more information is needed about the predictive validity of these tests. Thus, we investigated the relationship between performance in admissions tests and the Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination.The UKMED database (https://www.ukmed.ac.uk) was used to access medical school selection data for all UK graduates who attempted MRCS Part A (n=11 570) and Part B (n=5690) between 2007 and 2019. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models identified independent predictors of MRCS success. Pearson correlation coefficients examined the linear relationship between test scores and MRCS performance.Successful MRCS Part A candidates scored higher in A-Levels, UCAT, BMAT and GAMSAT (p<0.05). No significant differences were observed for MRCS Part B. All admissions tests were found to independently predict MRCS Part A performance after adjusting for prior academic attainment (A-Level performance) (p<0.05). Admission test scores demonstrated statistically significant correlations with MRCS Part A performance (p<0.001).The utility of admissions tests is clear with respect to helping medical schools select from large numbers of applicants for a limited number of places. Additionally, these tests appear to offer incremental value above A-Level performance alone. We expect this data to guide medical schools' use of admissions test scores in their selection process.

The effects of COVID-19 on training within urology: Lessons learned in virtual learning, human factors, non-technical skills and reflective practice

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed training and recruitment in urology in unprecedented ways. As efforts are made to ensure trainees can continue to progress, lessons can be learned to improve training and urological practice even after the acute phase of the pandemic is over. Novel methods of education through virtual learning have burgeoned amidst the social distancing the pandemic has brought. The importance of training in human factors and non-technical skills has also been brought to the fore while operating under the constraints of personal protective equipment and working in new teams and unfamiliar environments. This paper critically appraises the available evidence of how urological training has been affected by COVID-19 and the lessons we have learned and continue to learn going forward.

Level of Evidence

Not Applicable.

Should we recruit trainees into the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery pathway at the beginning of the second degree to ensure the long term viability of the specialty?

There has been a sustained decline in the number of trainees applying for entry into the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS) training program, which has sparked further debate on the issue of OMFS training and the future of the specialty in the United Kingdom. Here I discuss the option of recruiting the trainees into the program at the beginning of their second degree to streamline the training, and to improve the recruitment drive to ensure long term viability of the specialty.

Prediction of success at UK Specialty Board Examinations using the mandatory postgraduate UK surgical examination

Background

While performance in other mandatory examinations taken at the beginning of a doctor's career are predictive of final training outcomes, the influence early postgraduate surgical examinations might have on success at Specialty Board Exams in the UK is currently unknown. The aim was to investigate whether performance at the mandatory Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination, and other variables, are predictive of success at the Fellowship of the Royal College of Surgeons (FRCS) examination, thus potentially identifying those who may benefit from early academic intervention.

Methods

Pearson correlation coefficients examined the linear relationship between both examinations and logistic regression analysis identified potential independent predictors of FRCS success. All UK medical graduates who attempted either section of FRCS (Sections 1 and 2) between 2012 and 2018 were included.

Results

First attempt pass rates for Sections 1 and 2 FRCS were 87.4 per cent (n = 854) and 91.8 per cent (n = 797) respectively. In logistic regression analysis, sex (male: odds ratio (OR) 2.32, 95 per cent c.i 1.43 to 3.76), age (less than 29 years at graduation: OR 3.22, 1.88 to 5.51), Part B MRCS attempts (1 attempt: OR 1.77, 1.08 to 3.00), Part A score (OR 1.14, 1.09 to 1.89) and Part B score (OR 1.06, 1.03 to 1.09) were independent predictors of Section 1 FRCS success. Predictors of Section 2 FRCS success were age (less than 29 years at graduation: OR 3.55, 2.00 to 6.39), Part A score (OR 1.06, 1.02 to 1.11) and Section 1 FRCS score (OR 1.13, 1.07 to 1.18).

Conclusion

Part A and B MRCS performance were independent predictors of FRCS success, providing further evidence to support the predictive validity of this mandatory postgraduate exam. However, future research must explore the reasons between the attainment gaps observed for different groups of doctors.

Effect of sex on specialty training application outcomes: a longitudinal administrative data study of UK medical graduates

OBJECTIVES

To examine sex differences in the specialty training recruitment outcomes of UK medical graduates; and whether sex differences were explained by prior academic attainment and previous fitness to practise (FtP) declarations.

DESIGN

Retrospective longitudinal cohort study.

SETTING

Administrative data on entrants to all UK medical schools from the UK Medical Education Database.

PARTICIPANTS

10 559 doctors (6 155; 58% female) who entered a UK medical school in 2007 or 2008 and were eligible to apply for specialty training by 2015.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Odds of application, offer and acceptance to any specialty training programme, and on to each of the nine largest training programmes, adjusting for sex, other demographics, prior academic attainment, FtP declaration and medical school.

RESULTS

Across all specialties, there were no sex differences in applications for specialty training, but women had increased odds of getting an offer (OR=1.40; 95% CI=1.25 to 1.57; p<0.001) and accepting one (OR=1.43; 95% CI=1.19 to 1.71; p<0.001). Seven of the nine largest specialties showed significant sex differences in applications, which remained after adjusting for other factors. In the adjusted models, Paediatrics (OR=1.57; 95% CI=1.01 to 2.46; p=0.046) and general practice (GP) (OR=1.23; 95% CI=1.03 to 1.46; p=0.017) were the only specialties to show sex differences in offers, both favouring women. GP alone showed sex differences in acceptances, with women being more likely to accept (OR=1.34; 95% CI=1.03 to 1.76; p=0.03). Doctors with an FtP declaration were slightly less likely to apply to specialty training overall (OR=0.84; 95% CI=0.71 to 1.00; p=0.048) and less likely to accept an offer to any programme (OR=0.71; 95% CI=0.52 to 0.98; p=0.036), after adjusting for confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

Sex segregation between medical specialties is due to differential application, although research is needed to understand why men are less likely to be offered a place on to GP and Paediatrics training, and if offered GP are less likely to accept.

Does the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination predict 'on-the-job' performance during UK higher specialty surgical training?

INTRODUCTION

The Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) is a mandatory examination to enter higher surgical specialty training in the UK. It is designed to help to ensure that successful candidates are competent to practice as higher surgical trainees. The annual review of competence progression (ARCP) assesses trainees' competence to progress to the next level of training and can be interpreted as a measure of 'on-the-job' performance. We investigated the relationship between MRCS performance and ARCP outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All UK medical graduates who passed MRCS (Parts A and B) from 2007 to 2016 were included. MRCS scores, attempts and sociodemographics for each candidate were crosslinked with ARCP outcomes (satisfactory, unsatisfactory and insufficient evidence). Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify potential independent predictors of ARCP outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 2570 trainees underwent 11,064 ARCPs; 1589 (61.8%) had only satisfactory outcomes recorded throughout training; 510 (19.9%) had at least one unsatisfactory outcome; and 471 (18.3%) supplied insufficient evidence. After adjusting for age, gender, first language and Part A performance, ethnicity (non-white vs white, OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.71), Part B passing score (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.00) and number of attempts at Part B (two or more attempts vs one attempt, OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.94) were found to be independent predictors of an unsatisfactory ARCP outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to identify predictors of ARCP outcomes during higher surgical specialty training in the UK and provides further evidence of the predictive validity of the MRCS examination.

Low Pass-rate in postgraduate surgical examination in Nigeria and its contribution to the low surgeon workforce in the country; a review article

Surgical postgraduate examiners and examinees in Nigeria complain of the low pass rate at all levels of the postgraduate surgical training examinations to which several factors are contributing. For several years there has been being a persistently low surgeon workforce in the country despite having two surgeon producing institutions been for at least 37 years. A review of the probable causes was carried out to shed more light on the matter. At the time of writing there are 52 National Postgraduate Medical College of Nigeria (NPMCN) and 46 West African College of Surgeons (WACS) accredited post graduate surgery training programs in Nigeria compared with 99 in the United Kingdom (UK) and 1056 in the United States (US). Based on available data Nigeria has approximately 572 surgery residency training slots yearly compared with approximately 646 in the UK and 4225 in the US. Examination pass rate was less than 40% for primary WACS compared with 98% pass rate in USMLE (United States Medical Licensing Examination) 3, pass rate at part I was 28.8% for WACS compared with 37% at MRCS (Membership Royal College of Surgeons) part A and 57% for MRCS part B. For the exit examination or part II WACS pass rate was 31.5% (general surgery) while it was 64% for Fellowship Royal College of Surgeons (FRCS) cumulative and 70% in the American board of surgery (ABS). Surgeon per 100 000 population was 0.69 for Nigeria compared with 11.7 and 25.6 for the UK and US respectively. In the last 35 years WACS has produced 1638 surgeons (2.8 times more than NPMCN) in surgery and NPMCN has produced 572. The frequency of examination were twice per year for both WACS and NPMCN examinations, 3 times per year for the USMLE step 3, MRCS (A & B) and Fellowship Royal College of Surgeons (FRCS) general surgery. The American Board of Surgery (ABS) is once per year for Qualifying Examination (QE) and 5 times per year for Certifying Examination (CE).