Preoperative Disclosure of Surgical Trainee Involvement: Pandora's Box or an Opportunity for Enlightenment?

The Resident-Run Minor Surgery Clinic: A Four-Year Analysis of Patient Outcomes, Satisfaction, and Resident Education

OBJECTIVE

A resident-run minor surgery clinic was developed to increase resident procedural autonomy. We evaluated whether 1) there was a significant difference between complications and patient satisfaction when procedures were independently performed by surgical residents vs. a surgical attending and 2) if participation was associated with an increase in resident procedural confidence.

DESIGN

Third year general surgery residents participated in a weekly procedure clinic from 2014-2018. Post-procedure complications and patient satisfaction were compared between patients operated on by residents vs. the staff surgeon. Residents were surveyed regarding their confidence in independently performing a variety of clinic-based patient care tasks.

SETTING

Massachusetts General Hospital General in Boston, MA; an academic tertiary care general surgery residency program.

PARTICIPANTS

Post-graduate year three general surgery residents that ran the clinic as part of a general surgery rotation.

RESULTS

1230 patients underwent 1592 procedures (612 in resident clinic, 980 in attending clinic). There was no significant difference in the 30-day complication rate between patients operated on by the resident vs. attending (2.5% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.49). 459 patient satisfaction surveys were administered with a 79.1% response rate. There was no significant difference in the overall quality of care rating between residents and the attending surgeon (87.5% top-box rating vs. 93.1%, p = 0.15). Twenty-one residents completed both a pre- and post-rotation survey (77.8% response rate). The proportion of residents indicating that they could independently perform a variety of patient care tasks significantly increased across the rotation (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Mid-level general surgery residents can independently perform office-based procedures without detriment to safety or patient satisfaction. The resident-run procedure clinic serves as an environment for residents to grow in confidence in both technical and non-technical skills. Given the high rate at which patients provide resident feedback, future work may investigate how to best incorporate patient derived evaluations into resident assessment.

"Let's Get the Consent Together": Rethinking How Surgeons Become Competent to Discuss Informed Consent

OBJECTIVE

Eliciting informed consent is a clinical skill that many residents are tasked to conduct without sufficient training and before they are competent to do so. Even senior residents and often attending physicians fall short of following best practices when conducting consent conversations.

DESIGN

This is a perspective on strategies to improve how residents learn to collect informed consent based on current literature.

CONCLUSIONS

We advocate that surgical educators approach teaching informed consent with a similar framework as is used for other surgical skills. Informed consent should be defined as a core clinical skill for which attendings themselves should be sufficiently competent and residents should be assessed through direct observation prior to entrustment.

Toward Autonomy and Conditional Independence: A Standardized Script Improves Patient Acceptance of Surgical Trainee Roles

BACKGROUND

Progressive autonomy leading to conditional independence is necessary to achieve competence in surgical skills and decision making. Trust and transparency are ethical imperatives, but practices vary regarding the extent of disclosure of specific resident roles. We tested whether a standardized preoperative script would improve patient acceptance of resident involvement in perioperative care.

METHODS

Patients admitted to a resident-run acute care general surgery service between October 2017 and October 2018 were enrolled in an IRB-approved study. During the first half of the rotation (control), operative consent was obtained according to individual practice without specified explanation of resident roles. During the second half (intervention), the senior resident read a short semistructured script specifically explaining team roles and responsibilities, including the degree of resident independence and supervision by attendings. On postoperative day 3, patients completed a survey assessing understanding of their surgical care.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients under the care of 10 rotating chief residents were enrolled; 46 patients completed the survey, 23 in each arm (74% response rate). Ten patients in the control arm (43%) compared to only 3 (13%) in the intervention arm indicated that residents should not be allowed to perform portions of operations (odds ratio 4.94, p = 0.047). Patients in the intervention arm felt that care team roles were more adequately explained to them before their operation (p = 0.002). There was no difference in the number of patients naming a resident as "their doctor."

CONCLUSIONS

Use of a short script specifying resident roles improves patient acceptance of trainee participation in perioperative care.

A Pilot Study of Inpatient Satisfaction Rating of Surgical Resident Care

OBJECTIVE

To describe inpatient satisfaction with surgical resident care given the increasing importance of patient satisfaction as a quality metric.

DESIGN

Surgical inpatients were invited to complete a survey that addressed their satisfaction with and attitudes regarding surgical resident care. The survey was based on the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Surgical Care Survey (S-CAHPS). Patients were required to positively identify photos of resident physicians prior to providing ratings. Adapted S-CAHPS items were scored using the "top-box" method.

SETTING

Massachusetts General Hospital, a tertiary academic center.

PARTICIPANTS

General surgery inpatients recovering from elective, major abdominal surgery were recruited on postoperative days 2 to 4.

RESULTS

Ninety-one percent of approached patients participated (102/112, mean age = 62.9, 51.6% male). Patients positively identified both seniors and interns 88% of the time. Thirteen seniors and 19 interns were rated, with 1 to 14 evaluations per trainee. Overall quality of care ratings for seniors and interns were 9.35 and 9.09, respectively (0-10 scale, 10 = "best possible care"). Sixty-three percent of senior resident evaluations and 60% of intern evaluations received a score of 10. The proportion of residents receiving top-box scores ranged from 59.5% to 97.7% depending on the item. Forty percent of senior resident and 38% of intern evaluations received top-box scores for all 8 items. Over 96% of patients reported strong or moderate agreement with the statements "I feel it is important to help in the education of future surgeons."

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical inpatients willingly completed ratings about their surgery residents, typically can recognize their resident physicians, and rate quality of care highly. Despite many high ratings, there is room for improvement in some S-CAHPS domains. These results indicate patients are a valuable source of feedback regarding a resident's progress in several core competencies such as interpersonal skills, communication, professionalism, and patient care.