Unifying the Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery Fellowship Curriculum via Delphi Consensus

It is time for reform: Results from a questionnaire survey on the current status of next generation HBP surgeons in Japan

A questionnaire survey was designed and performed to assess the current status of "next generation" hepatobiliary and pancreatic (HBP) surgeons regarding surgical training, career, recruiting, and work-life balance in Japan. Using a valid email address, a questionnaire was sent to members of the Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgeons (JSHBPS) who were under 45 years old. The questionnaire comprised 50 questions across the following four sections: (i) board certification of JSHBPS, (ii) research activity and overseas study, (iii) recruiting, and (iv) work-life balance. A questionnaire survey was sent to 1735 HBP surgeons and responses were received from 303 members (17.5%). In a survey with 303 respondents, over 45.9% were above 41 years old, 93.7% were male, and 91.0% were affiliated with university surgery departments. About 25.1% were JSHBPS board-certified, while 72.7% of uncertified doctors aspired for the certification. Research activity was deemed crucial by 74.9%. Recruitment targeting postgraduate years 1-5 was recommended, with the technical difficulty of surgery being the main reason for choosing HBP. Regarding work-life balance, excessive work and classical work style were regarded as a hindrance to the sustainability of working practices. This survey highlighted that next generation HBP surgeons are highly motivated to acquire advanced surgical skills and recognize the importance of research experience. However, they are facing long working hours and insufficient training opportunities. Fundamental reforms, such as revising the training curriculum, improving work styles, and enhancing recruitment, are necessary steps forward to ensure the sustainability of HBP surgery in Japan.

Benefits and barriers to accreditation of HPB center and fellowship programs in Europe: a strength-weakness-opportunity-and-threats (SWOT) analysis by an E-AHPBA-ESSO-UEMS ad hoc working committee

BACKGROUND

Training in HPB surgery lacks uniformity across regions covered by the E-AHPBA. Accreditation has been in place for centers and fellowship programs, but with low uptake. The decision whether to continue, change or cease such accreditation is being discussed. Thus, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis was conducted.

METHODS

A mixed-methods, cross-sectional study among stakeholders in E-AHPBA, ESSO and UEMS under the E-AHPBA executive council was founded, ensuring representation by gender and geographic distribution.

RESULTS

Responses were collected from across E-AHPBA regions, with response from 15 of 24 subchapters. The most frequent and recurring themes are presented in a SWOT matrix which allows for paired evaluations of factors deemed to be helpful (Strengths and Opportunities), those that are harmful (Weaknesses and Threats).

CONCLUSION

This study identified both helpful and harmful effects to an accreditation process of HPB centers or HPB fellowship training across the E-AHPBA membership region. Formal accreditation of centers is not within the scope, nor jurisdiction nor financial capacity for E-AHPBA in the current situation. A strong interest in formal HPB training should be capitalized into E-AHPBA strategic planning towards a structured accreditation system for HPB fellowship programs or HPB training tracks.

Roles, Responsibilities, and Expectations of Medical Students on Surgical Subinternships: A Modified Delphi Consensus Study

PURPOSE

Surgical subinternships are important rotations for students preparing for a career in general surgery; however, these rotations often vary by institution and service. This modified Delphi study was conducted to reach a consensus set of roles, responsibilities, and expectations of fourth-year medical students on their surgical subinternships.

METHOD

Candidate statements on roles, responsibilities, and expectations of subinterns were categorized into 7 domains: rotation structure, rounding and patient care, operating room conduct, technical skills, knowledge base, clinic, and professionalism. Expert panels were assembled of key stakeholders: program directors, clerkship directors, other education faculty, trainees, and recent subinterns. Three Delphi rounds were conducted from January to April 2023 to reach consensus defined a priori as a Cronbach α ≥ 0.8 and 80% or greater panel agreement.

RESULTS

Forty-six expert panelists were recruited to participate in Delphi rounds, with 100%, 95.7%, and 97.8% response rates in the first, second, and third rounds, respectively. By the third round, 67 statements reached consensus as essential roles, responsibilities, and expectations of surgical subinterns. Key themes from these 67 statements included subinterns approximating the role of an intern with respect to work hours, patient care responsibilities, basic technical skills, and knowledge base. Panelists rated rounding and patient care as the most important domain, followed closely by professionalism. Additional key domains for evaluation in descending order were knowledge base, operating room conduct, clinic, and technical skills. By the third round, notable disagreements in the Delphi process included technical skills and rounding and patient care (93.3% and 88.9% agreement, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a national consensus on core roles, responsibilities, and expectations for medical students completing surgical subinternships. Students can use these recommendations to prepare for subinternships, whereas faculty as well as residents and fellows can use them to evaluate applicants for general surgery residency positions.

Developing Gender-Affirming Surgery Curricula for Plastic Surgery Residency and Fellowship via Delphi Consensus

BACKGROUND

Gender-affirming surgery (GAS) is a rapidly growing field within plastic surgery, and residents and fellows must receive appropriate training. However, there are no standardized surgical training curricula. The objective of this study was to identify core curricula within the field of GAS.

METHODS

Four GAS surgeons from different academic institutions identified initial curricular statements within six categories: (1) comprehensive GAS care, (2) gender-affirming facial surgery, (3) masculinizing chest surgery, (4) feminizing breast augmentation, (5) masculinizing genital GAS, and (6) feminizing genital GAS. Expert panelists consisting of plastic surgery residency program directors and GAS surgeons were recruited for three rounds of the Delphi-consensus process. The panelists decided whether each curriculum statement was appropriate for residency, fellowship, or neither. A statement was included in the final curriculum when Cronbach α value was greater than or equal to 0.8, meaning that 80% or more of the panel agreed on inclusion.

RESULTS

A total of 34 panelists (14 plastic surgery residency program directors and 20 GAS surgeons representing 28 US institutions) participated. The response rate was 85% for the first round, 94% for the second, and 100% for the third. Out of 124 initial curriculum statements, 84 reached consensus for the final GAS curricula, 51 for residency, and 31 for fellowship.

CONCLUSIONS

A national consensus on core GAS curriculum for plastic surgery residency and GAS fellowship was achieved by a modified Delphi method. Implementation of this curriculum will ensure that trainees in plastic surgery are adequately prepared in the field of GAS.

Teaching modern pancreatic surgery: close relationship between centralization, innovation, and dissemination of care

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic surgery is increasingly moving towards centralization in high-volume centres, supported by evidence on the volume-outcome relationship. At the same time, minimally invasive pancreatic surgery is becoming more and more established worldwide, and interest in new techniques, such as robotic pancreatoduodenectomy, is growing. Such recent innovations are reshaping modern pancreatic surgery, but they also represent new challenges for surgical training in its current form.

METHODS

This narrative review presents a chosen selection of literature, giving a picture of the current state of training in pancreatic surgery, together with the authors' own views, and in the context of centralization and innovation towards minimally invasive techniques.

RESULTS

Centralization of pancreatic surgery at high-volume centres, volume-outcome relationships, innovation through minimally invasive technologies, learning curves in both traditional and minimally invasive surgery, and standardized training paths are the different, but deeply interconnected, topics of this article. Proper training is essential to ensure quality of care, but innovation and centralization may represent challenges to overcome with new training models.

CONCLUSION

Innovations in pancreatic surgery are introduced with the aim of increasing the quality of care. However, their successful implementation is deeply dependent on dissemination and standardization of surgical training, adapted to fit in the changing landscape of modern pancreatic surgery.

Getting going: Incorporating ultrasound into an HPB practice

The incorporation of ultrasound into a hepatopancreatobiliary surgical practice is both exciting and potentially intimidating. Although it is relatively straightforward to obtain detailed intraoperative ultrasound training from a small variety of formal programs, didactic curriculum, and mentorship experiences, seamless integration of this new knowledge into a hepatopancreatobiliary practice can be more challenging than expected. Although this is particularly true when a graduate begins a new practice, it is also relevant when incorporating hepatopancreatobiliary ultrasound into a mature group practice environment. This review outlines knowing your environment, certification and competency, credentialing and privileging, transition to independent practice, and maintaining competence.

The ESSO core curriculum committee update on surgical oncology

INTRODUCTION

Surgical oncology is a defined specialty within the European Board of Surgery within the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). Variation in training and specialization still occurs across Europe. There is a need to align the core knowledge needed to fulfil the criteria across subspecialities in surgical oncology.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The core curriculum, established in 2013, was developed with contributions from expert advisors from within the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) and related subspeciality experts.

RESULTS

The current version reiterates and updates the core curriculum structure needed for current and future candidates who plans to train for and eventually sit the European fellowship exam for the European Board of Surgery in Surgical Oncology. The content included is not intended to be exhaustive but, rather to give the candidate an idea of expectations and areas for in depth study, in addition to the practical requirements. The five elements included are: Basic principles of oncology; Disease site specific oncology; Generic clinical skills; Training recommendations, and, lastly; Eligibility for the EBSQ exam in Surgical Oncology.

CONCLUSIONS

As evidence-based care for cancer patients evolves through research into basic science, translational research and clinical trials, the core curriculum will evolve, mature and adapt to deliver continual improvements in cancer outcomes for patients.