Training a new generation of surgical oncologists worldwide

Series on The Lancet Oncology Commission on Global Cancer Surgery Action 2: Education and Training

BACKGROUND

The ability to deliver safe, timely, affordable, and high-quality cancer surgery depends on an adequate cadre of well-trained and competent cancer surgeons. It is well-known that wide variations and inequities exist in the educational platforms for training cancer surgeons on the global stage. The second Lancet Oncology Commission on Global Cancer Surgery Action on education and training is geared toward creating robust, sustainable, and affordable educational platforms for training cancer surgeons globally.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This study used the principles of implementation science taken from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to help develop the content and increase the likelihood of success in implementing the recommendations in this Action.

CONCLUSION

The Annals of Surgical Oncology series on the Second Lancet Oncology Commission on Global Cancer Surgery hopes to enhance the visibility of the eight critical actions within this important Commission to the primary stakeholders, the surgeons. Thie authors hope this Action on education and training will help to increase availability and modernize and develop contextually appropriate and resource-stratified educational platforms of appropriate length for training the next generation of competent cancer surgeons.

Competency-Based Medical Education (CBME): an Overview and Relevance to the Education of Future Surgical Oncologists

In the next two decades, the global cancer burden is expected to rise by 47%, and the demand for global cancer surgery will increase by 52%. At present, only 25% of the estimated 80% of patients needing surgical intervention have access to timely surgical care. The shortage of a trained workforce of surgical oncologists is one of the main barriers to providing the optimal surgical intervention needed for cancer patients. Some of the contributing factors to the shortage of trained surgical oncologists are variations in the current global educational platforms, long training programs, and physician burnout. Therefore, the availability of a credible training framework and a sustainable certification pipeline for future surgical oncologists is critical to meet the global demand for an adequate healthcare workforce. The current surgical oncology educational program is a time-based construct that trains surgeons to function seamlessly in the multidisciplinary care of cancer patients. However, there is a lack of flexibility in the training framework and timeline despite differences in trainees' abilities. Developing a globally acceptable standard curriculum for surgical oncology training based on the competency-based medical education (CBME) framework and tailoring it to local needs can increase the surgical oncology workforce ready to tackle the rising cancer burden. However, successful implementation of the global CBME-based surgical oncology training curriculum requires an innovative approach to ensure that this framework produces a competent surgical oncologist that meets the local needs.

Motivations for and Challenges in the Development of Global Medical Curricula: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

The aim of this scoping review is to understand the motivations for the creation of global medical curricula, summarize methods that have been used to create these curricula, and understand the perceived premises for the creation of these curricula.

METHOD

In 2018, the authors used a comprehensive search strategy to identify papers on existing efforts to create global medical curricula published from 1998 to March 29, 2018, in the following databases: MEDLINE; MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process, and Other Non-Indexed Citations; Embase; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; PsycINFO; CINAHL; ERIC; Scopus; African Index Medicus; and LILACS. There were no language restrictions. Two independent researchers applied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Demographic data were abstracted from publications and summarized. The stated purposes, methods used for the development, stated motivations, and reported challenges of curricula were coded.

RESULTS

Of the 18,684 publications initially identified, 137 met inclusion criteria. The most common stated purposes for creating curricula were to define speciality-specific standards (50, 30%), to harmonize training standards (38, 23%), and to improve the quality or safety of training (31, 19%). The most common challenges were intercountry variation (including differences in health care systems, the operationalization of medical training, and sociocultural differences; 27, 20%), curricular implementation (20, 15%), and the need for a multistakeholder approach (6, 4%). Most curricula were developed by a social group (e.g., committee; 30, 45%) or Delphi or modified Delphi process (22, 33%).

CONCLUSIONS

The challenges of intercountry variation, the need for a multistakeholder approach, and curricular implementation need to be considered if concerns about curricular relevance are to be addressed. These challenges undoubtedly impact the uptake of global medical curricula and can only be addressed by explicit efforts to make curricula applicable to the realities of diverse health care settings.