An audit of European training in obstetrics and gynaecology

Being an obstetrics and gynaecology resident during the COVID-19: Impact of the pandemic on the residency training program

Objective

to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the obstetrics and gynecology residency training program in Italy.

Study design

This was a cross-sectional survey study aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the obstetrics and gynecology residency training program in Italy. An online survey with 45 questions was sent and completed anonymously by residents after accepting an informed consent. The invitation to the online survey was sent to all the Italian residents in obstetrics and gynecology. Those on maternity leave at the time of the study were excluded. Residents were asked about their routinely activity before the COVID-19 pandemic, and to report the reduction in their clinical practice. They were also asked about psychological impact of COVID-19 on their clinical practice.

Results

933 Italian residents in obstetrics and gynecology, were invited for this survey study. Four-hundred and seventy-six (51 %) completed the survey and were included in the study. Three-hundred and eighty-seven (81.3 %) were female, and 89 (18.7 %) were male. Residents age ranged from 25 to 42. In 71,8 % (342/476) of the cases residents work in a COVID-19 reference Hospitals. One-hundred and eighty-four out of 76 residents (38.6 %) were tested on RT-PCR assay of nasal and pharyngeal swab specimens, and of them 12/184 (6.5 %) were positive to SARS−COV-2. Regarding the use of personal protective equipment (PPE), 267 (56.1 %) reported to receive adequate device, and 379 (79.6 %) felt to be well informed about prevention and management protocols. Three-hundred and thirty-one residents (69.5 %) reported to have managed COVID-19 positive patients. For 54,7 % of respondent residents, training activity in general decreased significantly during the COVID-19 epidemic. A one-third reduction was reported in 31,4 % of the cases, whereas a total suspension of the training in 9,9 % of the cases. In 89,3 % of cases the reduction was caused by the reorganization of work. Anxiety about the professional future was reported in 84 % of the residents, and 59 % of them had the perception that their training was irreversibly compromised.

Conclusions

Among Italian residents in obstetrics and gynecology, COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a significant training impairment.

Workforce planning and training in Obstetrics and Gynaecology across Europe: A survey of national trainee societies

OBJECTIVE(S)

To describe the infrastructural differences in training in Obstetrics and Gynaecology (ObGyn) across Europe.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive web-based survey of 31 national ObGyn trainee societies representing the 30 member countries of the European Network of Trainees in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Answers were verified in a telephone interview and only countries which had completed the telephone interview were included in the final analysis.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 28 of 31 societies representing 27 countries (response rate 90%). The median formal duration of training was 5 years (range 4-7). There were mandatory requirements in addition to medical school graduation before specialisation could be started in 20 (71%) countries. The job opportunities after completion of training varied and included academic fellowships (n=21 [75%]), clinical fellowships/junior consultancy (n=21 [75%]), consultancy (n=11 [40%]), and private practice (n=23 [82%)]. Training and working as a specialist abroad was uncommon (≤20% in 21 [78%] and 26 [96%] countries respectively). Exams during ObGyn training were offered in 24 (85%) countries. Unemployment after completion of training was rare (<5% in 26 [93%] countries). Assessment of ObGyn specialists took place in 20 (71%) countries.

CONCLUSION(S)

The study illustrates that there are organisational variations in ObGyn training in Europe; A) The requirements to obtain a training post vary causing differences in the qualifications of trainees starting training. B) The duration of training varies. And C) newly trained specialists carry varying levels of responsibility. The results suggest that the content, organisation, and outcome of training differ across Europe. Differences due to political, social and cultural reasons are expected. However, further harmonisation of training across Europe still seems desirable in order to improve women's healthcare and facilitate the mobility of ObGyn trainees and specialists across Europe. There are currently several European initiatives, however, national and local measures are essential for training to improve.

The Changing Scenario of Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency Training

BACKGROUND

Significant changes have been noted in aspects of obstetrics-gynecology (ob-gyn) training over the last decade, which is reflected in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) operative case logs for graduating ob-gyn residents.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to understand the changing trends of ob-gyn residents' experience in obstetric procedures over the past 11 years.

METHODS

We analyzed national ACGME procedure logs for all obstetric procedures recorded by 12 728 ob-gyn residents who graduated between academic years 2002-2003 and 2012-2013.

RESULTS

The average number of cesarean sections per resident increased from 191.8 in 2002-2003 to 233.4 in 2012-2013 (17%; P < .001; 95% CI -47.769 to -35.431), the number of vaginal deliveries declined from 320.8 to 261 (18.6%; P < .001; 95% CI 38.842-56.35), the number of forceps deliveries declined from 23.8 to 8.4 (64.7%; P < .001; 95% CI 14.061-16.739), and the number of vacuum deliveries declined from 23.8 to 17.6 (26%; P < .001; 95% CI 5.043-7.357). Between 2002-2003 and 2007-2008, amniocentesis decreased from 18.5 to 11 (P < .001, 95% CI 6.298-8.702), and multifetal vaginal deliveries increased from 10.8 to 14 (P < .001, 95% CI -3.895 to -2.505). Both were not included in ACGME reporting after 2008.

CONCLUSIONS

Ob-gyn residents' training experience changed substantially over the past decade. ACGME obstetric logs demonstrated decreases in volume of vaginal, forceps, and vacuum deliveries, and increases in cesarean and multifetal deliveries. Change in experience may require use of innovative strategies to help improve residents' basic obstetric skills.

Exploring the scope of practice and training of obstetricians and gynaecologists in England, Italy and Belgium: a qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

This study explores the scope of practice of Obstetrics and Gynaecology specialists in Italy, Belgium and England, in light of the growth of professional and patient mobility within the EU which has raised concerns about a lack of standardisation of medical speciality practice and training.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 29 obstetricians and gynaecologists from England, Belgium and Italy, exploring training and scope of practice, following a common topic guide. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and coded following a common coding framework in the language of the country concerned. Completed coding frames, written summaries and key quotes were then translated into English and were cross-analysed among the researchers to identify emerging themes and comparative findings.

RESULTS

Although medical and specialty qualifications in each country are mutually recognised, there were great differences in training regimes, with different emphases on theory versus practice and recognition of different subspecialties. However all countries shared concerns about the impact of the European Working Time Directive on trainees' skills development. Reflecting differences in models of care, the scope of practice of OBGYN varied among countries, with pronounced differences between the public and private sector within countries. Technological advances and the growth of co-morbidities resulting from ageing populations have created new opportunities and greater links with other specialties. In turn new ethical concerns around abortion and fertility have also arisen, with stark cultural differences between the countries.

CONCLUSION

Variations exist in the training and scope of practice of OBGYN specialists among these three countries, which could have significant implications for the expectations of patients seeking care and specialists practising in other EU countries. Changes within the specialty and advances in technology are creating new opportunities and challenges, although these may widen existing differences. Harmonisation of the training and scope of practice of OBGYN within Europe remains a distant goal. Further research on the scope of practice of medical professionals would better inform future policies on professional mobility.