Core Professionalism Education in Surgery: A Systematic Review

Ethics in the operating room: a systematic review

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

The act of surgery involves harming vulnerable patients with the intent that the results will improve their health and, ultimately, help the patients. Such activities will inevitably entail moral decisions, yet the ethics of surgery has only recently developed as a field of medical ethics. Within this field, it is striking how few accounts there are of actions within the operating room. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate how much of the scientific publications on surgical ethics focus on what take place inside the operating room and to explore the ethical issues included in the publications that focus on medical ethics in the operating room.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the Medline and Embase databases using a PICO model and the search terms "surgery", "ethics" and "operating room". Papers were included if they focused on doctors, entailed activities inside the operating room and contained some ethical analysis. Thematic synthesis was used for data extraction and analysis.

FINDINGS

Fewer than 2% of the scientific publications on surgical ethics included activities inside the operating room. A total of 108 studies were included in the full-text analysis and reported according to the RESERVE guidelines. Eight content areas covered 2/3 of the included papers: DNR orders in the OR, overlapping surgery, donation of organs, broadcasting live surgery, video recordings in the OR, communication/teamwork, implementing new surgical technology, and denying blood to Jehovah's Witness.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review indicates that only a small fraction of scientific publications on the ethics of surgery focus on issues inside the operating room, accentuating the need for further research to close this gap. The ethical issues that repeatedly arose in the included papers included the meaning of patient autonomy inside the operating room, the consequences of technological advances in surgery, the balancing of legitimate interests, the dehumanising potential of the OR, and the strong notion of surgeon responsibility.

A review of professionalism in surgery

Physicians, and specifically surgeons, have unique expectations and responsibilities regarding professionalism. Further, surgeons interact with multiple different groups of people including surgical peers, trainees, other physicians, ancillary care partners, and patients. Communication between all of these groups must be respectful, appropriate, and effective, even in the high-stress environment of surgery. Norms of professional behavior are evolving to reflect the practices of the current era as well as the increasingly diverse surgical workforce. Thus, multiple surgical societies as well as the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education have incorporated professionalism as a core pillar of surgeon evaluation. While professionalism has typically been modeled, the trait is now being more formally taught in medical education pathways. Future directions for professionalism in surgery include validated modules, more formalized surgeon review, linkage to credentialing, and reimbursement.

The effect of interprofessional education on interprofessional professionalism behaviors of the surgical team members

INTRODUCTION

Interprofessional professionalism (IPP) has been introduced as one of the critical sub-competencies of interprofessional collaboration. This study aimed to assess the effect of interprofessional education on the behavior of interprofessional professionalism among the surgical team in the intervention compared to the control group.

METHODS

This is a quasi-experimental study. The participants were nurses in anesthetist and surgical technology and surgical residents of Shahid Sadoughi Hospital (n = 150) who were included in the study by the census. The intervention employed an interprofessional case-based learning strategy to explore themes of interprofessional professionalism. Two assessors used the Interprofessional Professionalism Assessment (IPA) tool to measure learners' performance while observing them in practice prior to the intervention, one and three months after the intervention. Data were analyzed using descriptive tests (mean and SD) and RM-ANOVA.

RESULTS

In this study, the participants in the intervention (n = 78) and the control (n = 72) groups entered the study. The Baseline IPA scores of participants were reported as 1.25 (0.12) and 1.21 (0.1) in the intervention and control groups, respectively. The IPA score of the participants in the intervention group (2.59 (0.26) and 2.54 (0.24)) was higher than the control group (1.17 (0.08) and 1.12 (0.07)) after one and three months of the intervention (P = 0.0001). The effect of educational interventions was reported at the large level (Eta Square = 0.89).

CONCLUSION

Interprofessional professionalism in surgical teams has been recognized as a critical element of team-based care. The present study used an interprofessional education strategy to develop IPP behavior. All professions benefited from interprofessional education. It is suggested that all surgical team professionals participate in interprofessional education.

Professionalism among medical residents in a young second-level university in Iran: a cross-sectional study

Professionalism is a set of behaviors that build trust in physicians’ relationships with patients and the public. The aim of this study was to assess professionalism among residents in Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran.

This cross-sectional study was conducted on 139 residents recruited through the census method. Data were collected using the American Board of Internal Medicine Professionalism Questionnaire. The first part of the questionnaire was on residents’ personal characteristics, and the second part contained fifteen items in the three domains of professionalism, namely excellence, honor/integrity, and altruism/respect. The mean scores of the questionnaire and its domains were calculated and their relationships with residents’ personal characteristics were evaluated.

The mean scores (± SD) of professionalism and its excellence, honor/integrity, and altruism/respect domains were 4.93 ± 2.4, 5.92 ± 1.85, 4.94 ± 3.39, and 4.35 ± 3.27, respectively (in a range of 0-10). Professionalism had significant relationships only with residents’ specialty and gender.

The level of professionalism in residents was low, which requires the attention of educational authorities. Moreover, the mean score of professionalism among residents in surgical specialties was significantly lower than non-surgical specialties. Various factors can be considered in this regard and it cannot be concluded that the lower score means worse professional behavior.