The Current State of Global Surgery Training in Plastic Surgery Residency.
Abstract
[BACKGROUND] The current state of global surgery training in U.S. plastic surgery residency programs remains largely undefined.
[METHODS] An electronic survey was distributed to Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-certified plastic surgery residency programs. Programs with global health curricula were queried regarding classification, collaboration details, regions visited, conditions/procedures encountered, costs, accreditation, and personal sentiment. Residencies without global health curricula were asked to select barriers.
[RESULTS] Sixty-four of 81 residency programs returned questionnaires (response rate, 79 percent). Twenty-six programs (41 percent) reported including a formal global health curriculum; 38 did not (59 percent). When asked to classify this curriculum, most selected clinical care experience [n = 24 (92 percent)], followed by educational experience [n = 19 (73 percent)]. Personal reference was the most common means of establishing the international collaboration [n = 19 (73 percent)]. The most commonly encountered conditions were cleft lip-cleft palate [n = 26 (100 percent)], thermal injury [n = 17 (65 percent)], and posttraumatic reconstruction [n = 15 (57 percent)]. Dominant funding sources were primarily nonprofit organizations [n = 14 (53 percent)]. Although the majority of programs had not applied for residency review committee accreditation [n = 23 (88 percent)], many considered applying [n = 16 (62 percent)]. Overall, 96 percent of programs (n = 25) supported global health training in residency, choosing exposure to different health systems [n = 22 (88 percent)] and surgical education [n = 17 (68 percent)] as reasons. Programs not offering a global health experience most commonly reported lack of residency review committee/plastic surgery operative log recognition of cases performed abroad [n = 27 (71 percent)], funding for trip expenses [n = 25 (66 percent)], and salary support [n = 24 (63 percent)] as barriers.
[CONCLUSIONS] Residencies incorporating global health training describe the experience positively. Funding and case accreditation are the major obstacles to implementing these curricula.
[METHODS] An electronic survey was distributed to Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-certified plastic surgery residency programs. Programs with global health curricula were queried regarding classification, collaboration details, regions visited, conditions/procedures encountered, costs, accreditation, and personal sentiment. Residencies without global health curricula were asked to select barriers.
[RESULTS] Sixty-four of 81 residency programs returned questionnaires (response rate, 79 percent). Twenty-six programs (41 percent) reported including a formal global health curriculum; 38 did not (59 percent). When asked to classify this curriculum, most selected clinical care experience [n = 24 (92 percent)], followed by educational experience [n = 19 (73 percent)]. Personal reference was the most common means of establishing the international collaboration [n = 19 (73 percent)]. The most commonly encountered conditions were cleft lip-cleft palate [n = 26 (100 percent)], thermal injury [n = 17 (65 percent)], and posttraumatic reconstruction [n = 15 (57 percent)]. Dominant funding sources were primarily nonprofit organizations [n = 14 (53 percent)]. Although the majority of programs had not applied for residency review committee accreditation [n = 23 (88 percent)], many considered applying [n = 16 (62 percent)]. Overall, 96 percent of programs (n = 25) supported global health training in residency, choosing exposure to different health systems [n = 22 (88 percent)] and surgical education [n = 17 (68 percent)] as reasons. Programs not offering a global health experience most commonly reported lack of residency review committee/plastic surgery operative log recognition of cases performed abroad [n = 27 (71 percent)], funding for trip expenses [n = 25 (66 percent)], and salary support [n = 24 (63 percent)] as barriers.
[CONCLUSIONS] Residencies incorporating global health training describe the experience positively. Funding and case accreditation are the major obstacles to implementing these curricula.
추출된 의학 개체 (NER)
| 유형 | 영어 표현 | 한국어 / 풀이 | UMLS CUI | 출처 | 등장 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 약물 | [BACKGROUND]
|
scispacy | 1 | ||
| 약물 | conditions/procedures
|
scispacy | 1 | ||
| 약물 | [CONCLUSIONS] Residencies
|
scispacy | 1 | ||
| 질환 | cleft lip-cleft palate
|
C0158646
Cleft palate with cleft lip
|
scispacy | 1 |
MeSH Terms
Accreditation; Curriculum; International Cooperation; Internship and Residency; Surgery, Plastic; Surveys and Questionnaires; United States