Gender and Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Operative Volumes of Graduating General Surgery Residents

Differential attainment in assessment of postgraduate surgical trainees: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Solving disparities in assessments is crucial to a successful surgical training programme. The first step in levelling these inequalities is recognising in what contexts they occur, and what protected characteristics are potentially implicated.

METHODS

This scoping review was based on Arksey & O'Malley's guiding principles. OVID and Embase were used to identify articles, which were then screened by three reviewers.

RESULTS

From an initial 358 articles, 53 reported on the presence of differential attainment in postgraduate surgical assessments. The majority were quantitative studies (77.4%), using retrospective designs. 11.3% were qualitative. Differential attainment affects a varied range of protected characteristics. The characteristics most likely to be investigated were gender (85%), ethnicity (37%) and socioeconomic background (7.5%). Evidence of inequalities are present in many types of assessment, including: academic achievements, assessments of progression in training, workplace-based assessments, logs of surgical experience and tests of technical skills.

CONCLUSION

Attainment gaps have been demonstrated in many types of assessment, including supposedly "objective" written assessments and at revalidation. Further research is necessary to delineate the most effective methods to eliminate bias in higher surgical training. Surgical curriculum providers should be informed by the available literature on inequalities in surgical training, as well as other neighbouring specialties such as medicine or general practice, when designing assessments and considering how to mitigate for potential causes of differential attainment.

Investigating racial/ethnic differences in procedure experience in obstetrics & gynecology trainees at a single academic institution: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Discrimination is common in medical education. Resident physicians of races and ethnicities underrepresented in medicine experience daily discrimination which has been proven to negatively impact training. There is limited data on the impact of resident race/ethnicity on OB/GYN surgical training. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of race/ethnicity on procedural experience in OB/GYN training.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of graduated OB/GYN resident case logs from 2009 to 2019 was performed at a single urban academic institution. Self-reported race/ethnicity data was collected. Association between URM and non-URM were analyzed using t-tests. Trainees were categorized by self-reported race/ethnicity into underrepresented in medicine (URM) (Black, Hispanic, Native American) and non-URM (White, Asian).

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 84 residents: 19% URM (N = 16) and 79% non-URM (n = 66). Difference between URM and non-URM status and average case volume was analyzed using t-tests. There was no difference between non-URM and URM trainees and reported mean number of Total GYN (349 vs. 334, p = 0.31) and Total OB (624 vs. 597, P = 0.11) case logs. However, compared with non-URM, on average URM performed fewer Total procedures (1562 vs. 1469, P = 0.04). Analyzing individual procedures showed a difference in average number of abortions performed between URM and non-URM (76 vs. 53, P = 0.02). There were no other statistically significant differences between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This single institution study highlights potential differences in trainee experience by race/ethnicity. Larger national studies are warranted to further explore these differences to identify bias and discrimination, and to ensure equitable experience for all trainees.

Gender-based Disparity Exists in the Surgical Experience of Female and Male Urology Residents

OBJECTIVE

To determine if a discrepancy exists in the number and type of cases logged between female and male urology residents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

ACGME case log data from 13 urology residency programs was collected from 2007 to 2020. The number and type of cases for each resident were recorded and correlated with resident gender and year of graduation. The median, 25th and 75th percentiles number of cases were calculated by gender, and then compared between female and male residents using Wilcoxon rank sum test.

RESULTS

A total of 473 residents were included in the study, 100 (21%) were female. Female residents completed significantly fewer cases, 2174, compared to male residents, 2273 (P = .038). Analysis by case type revealed male residents completed significantly more general urology (526 vs 571, P = .011) and oncology cases (261 vs 280, P = .026). Additionally, female residents had a 1.3-fold increased odds of logging a case in the assistant role than male residents (95% confidence interval: 1.27-1.34, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Gender-based disparity exists within the urology training of female and male residents. Male residents logged nearly 100 more cases than female residents over 4years, with significant differences in certain case subtypes and resident roles. The ACGME works to provide an equal training environment for all residents. Addressing this finding within individual training programs is critical.

Understanding and addressing varying perceptions of autonomy

Recently, there has been a major shift in the concept of resident autonomy in the operating room. As a result, surgical residents' independence has decreased during their training years. This change has been secondary to multiple factors, including fragmented attending resident interactions, hospital demands for productivity, operating room efficiency, and the public's perception of resident participation in surgery. Multiple gender, personality, and racial biases have also influenced the autonomy of surgical residents. In this paper, we have analyzed the impact of all these factors on the current state of resident autonomy after reviewing relevant literature. We have proposed a strategy to increase resident autonomy via increased resident and faculty interactions, case planning, and encouraged recruitment of diverse vascular surgery trainees and faculty.

Differences in emergency medicine resident procedural reporting by race and ethnicity

Background

The recruitment, retention, and training of physicians from groups underrepresented in medicine (UiM) is critically important to the practice of emergency medicine (EM). Studies across specialties have demonstrated disparities in operative experiences among UiM resident learners who are UiM; however, there are limited data on procedural disparities in EM.

Objective

We sought to quantify the association between racial and ethnic identities that are UiM and the number of procedures reported among EM residents.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective review of procedural differences by UiM status (using self-identified race and ethnicity) among graduating EM residents at nine training programs over a 10-year period. Sites were selected to ensure diversity of program length, program type, and geography. Data from residents in combined training programs, those who did not complete their full training at that institution, and those with missing data or electing not to report race/ethnicity were excluded. We calculated median and interquartile ranges for each procedure by UiM status. We conducted multivariable regression analyses accounting for UiM status, gender, and site as well as a sensitivity analysis excluding values >3 standard deviations from the mean for each procedure.

Results

We collected data from 988 total residents, with 718 (73%) being non-UiM, 204 (21%) being UiM, 48 (5%) electing not to specific race/ethnicity, and 18 (2%) missing race/ethnicity data. While unadjusted data demonstrated a difference between UiM and non-UiM resident numbers across several procedures, there were no significant differences in procedures reported after accounting for gender and site in the primary or sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions

We did not identify a statistically significant difference in reported procedures between UiM and non-UiM residents in EM. Future work should include qualitative investigations of UiM resident experience surrounding procedures as well as mixed-methods studies to examine how these data interact.

Defining the Disparity: A Multi-Institutional Analysis of Factors Associated With Decreased Resident Operative Experience

INTRODUCTION

Technical learning in surgical training is multifaceted and existing literature suggests a positive relationship between case volume and proficiency. Little is known about factors associated with a decreased volume of operative experience. This study aimed to identify resident and program factors associated with general surgery residents (GSR) in the bottom quartile of logged case volume upon program completion.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis of a multicenter study was used to examine case logs for categorical GSR. Participants included graduates between 2010 and 2020 from 20 programs. Residents below and above the 25th percentile for total operative volume were compared.

RESULTS

The present study includes 1343 GSR who graduated over the 11-y period. In total, 336 residents were below the 25th percentile and 1007 residents were above the 25th percentile. Those below the 25th percentile were more likely to be female (41% versus 34%, P = 0.02), identify as underrepresented in medicine (22% versus 14%, P < 0.01), and pursue fellowship (86% versus 80%, P = 0.01) compared to those above the 25th percentile. Residents below the 25th percentile were more likely to have graduated from a low volume program (55% versus 25%, P < 0.01) and from top National Institutes of Health funded institutions (57% versus 52%, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified individual and program characteristics associated with lower operative volume of GSR. Understanding such characteristics will aid surgical educators to achieve better equity in training.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Operative Experience Among General Surgery Residents: A Multi-Institutional Study from the US ROPE Consortium

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relationship between race/ethnicity and case volume among graduating surgical residents.

BACKGROUND

Racial/ethnic minority individuals face barriers to entry and advancement in surgery; however, no large-scale investigations of the operative experience of racial/ethnic minority residents have been performed.

METHODS

A multi-institutional retrospective analysis of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education case logs of categorical general surgery residents at 20 programs in the US Resident OPerative Experience Consortium database was performed. All residents graduating between 2010 and 2020 were included. The total, surgeon chief, surgeon junior, and teaching assistant case volumes were compared between racial/ethnic groups.

RESULTS

The cohort included 1343 residents. There were 211 (15.7%) Asian, 65 (4.8%) Black, 73 (5.4%) Hispanic, 71 (5.3%) "Other" (Native American or Multiple Race), and 923 (68.7%) White residents. On adjusted analysis, Black residents performed 76 fewer total cases (95% CI, -109 to -43, P <0.001) and 69 fewer surgeon junior cases (-98 to -40, P <0.001) than White residents. Comparing adjusted total case volume by graduation year, both Black residents and White residents performed more cases over time; however, there was no difference in the rates of annual increase (10 versus 12 cases per year increase, respectively, P =0.769). Thus, differences in total case volume persisted over the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

In this multi-institutional study, Black residents graduated with lower case volume than non-minority residents throughout the previous decade. Reduced operative learning opportunities may negatively impact professional advancement. Systemic interventions are needed to promote equitable operative experience and positive culture change.

Disparities in the Operative Experience Between Female and Male General Surgery Residents: A Multi-institutional Study From the US ROPE Consortium

OBJECTIVE

To examine differences in resident operative experience between male and female general surgery residents.

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing female representation in surgery, sex and gender disparities in residency experience continue to exist. The operative volume of male and female general surgery residents has not been compared on a multi-institutional level.

METHODS

Demographic characteristics and case logs were obtained for categorical general surgery graduates between 2010 and 2020 from the US Resident OPerative Experience Consortium database. Univariable, multivariable, and linear regression analyses were performed to compare differences in operative experience between male and female residents.

RESULTS

There were 1343 graduates from 20 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited programs, and 476 (35%) were females. There were no differences in age, race/ethnicity, or proportion pursuing fellowship between groups. Female graduates were less likely to be high-volume residents (27% vs 36%, P < 0.01). On univariable analysis, female graduates performed fewer total cases than male graduates (1140 vs 1177, P < 0.01), largely due to a diminished surgeon junior experience (829 vs 863, P < 0.01). On adjusted multivariable analysis, female sex was negatively associated with being a high-volume resident (OR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.98, P = 0.03). Over the 11-year study period, the annual total number of cases increased significantly for both groups, but female graduates (+16 cases/year) outpaced male graduates (+13 cases/year, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Female general surgery graduates performed significantly fewer cases than male graduates. Reassuringly, this gap in operative experience may be narrowing. Further interventions are warranted to promote equitable training opportunities that support and engage female residents.