Training in oral and maxillofacial surgery in Germany - Residents' satisfaction and future challenges

European Quality Markers in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Specialty Training: Defining Standards

According to the European Union (EU) Directive 2005/36, the medical specialty of oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) exists with two possible formats: dual degree OMFS called Dental, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (DOMFS) - basic medical and basic dental training and single medical degree Maxillofacial Surgery (MFS). Within the EU and across all of Europe, differences in the nature and quality of OMFS training coexist. By implementing the highest possible standards of training, patient care can be improved. To establish quality metrics for an ideal OMFS training programme, the European OMFS Trainee Forum of the Union Européenne des Médecins Spécialistes (UEMS) conducted a Delphi consensus protocol from November 2023 to January 2024. Facilitated by the OMFS Section of UEMS, 57 trainees from 32 countries participated. The process involved the definition of three quality levels using the red, amber, and green (RAG) rating system. Following the Delphi process, 46 domains were identified, including features within training programmes/rotations, teaching and education programmes, training placements, recording of training progression and activity, and external assessment of training programmes. The results were aligned with the UEMS OMFS European Training Requirement (ETR). With the introduction of a RAG rating, trainees and trainers can review their training programmes with the aim of improving them by moving domains from Red to Green. Raising the standard of training will benefit our patients. This initiative could mark a significant step towards the harmonisation of OMFS training, improving quality and ensuring consistent, high-level care throughout Europe.

#OMFSurgery: analyzing the use of social media applications in oral and maxillofacial surgery resident training

BACKGROUND

Despite its increasing popularity, to our knowledge the use of social media applications (SM) for residents' training in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS) has not been investigated yet. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of SM applications by OMFS residents for post-graduate training in Germany.

METHODS

For explorative assessment, an online questionnaire containing 27 questions about the current use of SM for resident training was sent to OMFS residents in Germany.

RESULTS

Sixty-four colleagues participated to the study. Thirty-four participants (54%) responded to regularly use those platforms mainly for OMFS-related content. YouTube (65%, n = 37), Instagram (48%, n = 27), ResearchGate (25%, n = 14) and WhatsApp (16%, n = 9) were the most popular platforms. (Surgical) videos (97%, n = 59), pictures and graphics (82%, n = 50) were the mainly accessed contents. Forty-four participants (69%) stated that SM substantially contributed to their OMFS training. Dentoalveolar surgery and implantology (66%, n = 35) and aesthetic facial surgery (55%, n = 29) content contributed most to OMFS resident training. Fifty-one participants (80%) recommended an official SM account of the DGMKG.

CONCLUSIONS

SM is frequently used by OMFS residents for the consumption of training-related content. There is an imbalance toward dentoalveolar and facial aesthetic surgery regarding the presented content. Academic institutions and societies should complement their educational activities to not miss this emerging educational innovation. Official SM content by academic institutions and societies could contribute to the existing educational activities.

The specialty of oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) in Europe - Part 1: service configuration, regulation, and provision

Oral and maxillofacial surgical (OMFS) practice and training in Europe is supported by the OMFS Section of the Union of European Medical Specialists (UEMS). Across Europe the number of OMFS specialists per 100,000 varies from 3.0 (Switzerland) to 0.28 (Ireland). The two types of OMFS within the European Union (EU) under Directive 2005/36 and European Free Trade Association (EFTA) treaties are dual degree dental, oral and maxillofacial surgery (DOMFS) and single medical degree maxillofacial surgery (MFS). Automatic recognition of OMFS specialist qualifications is possible only between nations which have the same (or both) types of medical OMFS. Otherwise, individual specialists must apply for a Certificate of Eligibility for Specialist Registration (CESR). DOMFS: 20 European nations have dual degree OMFS. Of these, 12 EU nations are DOMFS in Annex V, 3 are DOMFS in the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) Treaty, and one has mandated dual degree OMFS but is a dental specialty. The United Kingdom has dual degree OMFS. Two MFS nations have had mandated dual degree training for more than 10 years and one has both DOMFS and MFS training, with DOMFS recommended. Although no nation with dual degree DOMFS has transitioned back to single degree MFS, there are pressures to do so within Finland and Norway. MFS: 11 EU nations have single medical degree MFS (and 4 DOMFS nations also have MFS as a legacy specialty). Four nations in the EU/EFTA do not yet have a medical specialty of OMFS: Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, and Estonia.

The specialty of oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) in Europe - Part 2: training environment including the new Union of European Medical Specialists (UEMS) Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery European Training Requirement (OMFS ETR)

OMFS training in Europe has incrementally improved over the last 50 years. However, not all European nations have a formal written curriculum/syllabus, quality indicators, exit examinations, or guidelines for training programmes or trainers. In 2021 the OMFS Section of the Union of European Medical Specialists (UEMS) created an OMFS European Training Requirement (OMFS ETR) to help address these gaps and raise training standards in Europe. This paper includes key lessons from OMFS training programmes across Europe. It also summarises the new OMFS ETR as a comprehensive curriculum and syllabus. The ETR is a resource for nations with dual degree or single medical degree versions of the specialty. More importantly, it can act as a template for the handful of European Economic Area (EEA) nations that do not currently have a recognised OMFS specialty in Directive 2005/36 EU or the European Free Trade Association Treaty. By outlining the breadth and depth of the specialty, the ETR will be useful for competent regulatory authorities as well as OMFS trainees and trainers, patients, and politicians. The OMFS ETR includes key competencies and capabilities alongside training structures and documentation. A free unrestricted Access© database can be downloaded from www.omfsuesm.eu so OMFS experience can be recorded in a similar way across international borders. The OMFS ETR will be a living document. As it is unlikely that OMFS will remain frozen in time, this training document will also evolve. Its true value will become clear as it is used by current and future OMFS surgeons.

Dental Screening Including Panoramic Radiograph for Gorlin-Goltz Syndrome in Patients With Multiple Basal Cell Carcinomas

PURPOSE

To answer the following clinical research question: "Among patients with multiple basal cell carcinomas (mBCCs), can panoramic radiograph (PaR) facilitate the diagnosis of Gorlin-Goltz syndrome (GGS)?"

METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled mBCCs subjects who presented to a German tertiary care center between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2021. The primary predictor was presence of syndromic mBCCs, and the main outcomes were jaw cysts and odontogenic keratocysts (OKCs). Descriptive, bi- and multivariate statistics, diagnostic test evaluation, and number needed to screen (NNS) were computed at α = 95%.

RESULTS

The sample comprised 527 mBCCs patients (36.1% females; 6.8% GGS; 5.5% OKCs; mean age, 74.5 ± 15.8 years [range, 15-102]). There was a significant association between syndromic mBCCs and jaw cysts (P < .0001; NNS = 2 [95% CI, CI, 1.1 to 1.4]). In the adjusted logistic model, PaR identified GGS via radiographic diagnosis of jaw cysts in case of 1) age ≤ 35 years, 2) ≥ 5 BCCs, and 3) ≥ 1 high-risk BCCs. Nearly every jaw cyst identified by PaR was OKCs (P = .01; 95% CI, 3.1 to 3,101.4; NNS = 1.3 [95% CI, .9 to 2]). The post hoc power was 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Dental screening with the use of PaR for mBCCs patients, especially those aged ≤35 years, or with ≥5 BCCs, or ≥1 high-risk BCCs, may be helpful in detection and identification of GGS through recognition of OKCs.