Impacts on Surgery Resident Education at a First Wave COVID-19 Epicenter

Are COVID-Era General Surgery Interns Starting Residency Behind on Basic Surgical Skills?

OBJECTIVE

To compare incoming general surgery interns' performance on a basic skills assessment before and after the COVID pandemic.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study compared surgical skill performances of incoming general surgery interns. Each underwent an evidence-based standardized assessment (pretest) with 12-basic surgical knot tying and suturing tasks. A post-test was administered after a 3-month self-directed skills curriculum. Student's t-tests compared proficiency scores from pre-COVID vs. COVID-era general surgery interns before and after curriculum completion. p < 0.05 was significant.

SETTING

Data was collected from surgical residents in an academic general surgery program in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

General surgery interns from 2017 to 2019 (pre-COVID) and 2021 to 2022 (COVID-era) were included. Interns with missing data or extreme outliers were excluded. A total of 100 interns in general surgery were included in the pretest cohort (59 pre-COVID, 41 COVID-era) and 101 interns were in the post-test cohort (66 pre-COVID, 35 COVID-era).

RESULTS

COVID-era interns scored significantly lower on the pretest compared to pre-COVID interns (COVID-era 721.9+/-268.8 vs. pre-COVID 935.9+/- 228.0, p < 0.001). After the skills curriculum both cohorts improved their proficiency scores. However COVID-era interns still scored significantly lower (COVID-era 1255.0+/-166.3 vs. pre-COVID 1369.8+/-165.6, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis objectively described deficits in fundamental surgical skills for incoming interns whose medical school education was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. A targeted surgical skills curriculum partially remediated these deficiencies. However, many surgical interns may need additional intervention and potentially more time in order to fully develop their surgical skills and meet the competency requirements required for advancement.

Impact of COVID-19 on operating assignments in residency training of endocrine surgery: A retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Airborne pandemics illustrate a significant problem in training grounds. From the endocrine surgery point of view, we scrutinized the impact of Covid-19 on general surgery residency training in our university hospital.

METHODS

The number of endocrine procedure curves was forecasted using the expert modeler in a time series model from March to September 2020 based on data from previous years. We then compared the estimation curves to actual numbers.

RESULTS

There were 1340 resident participants in thyroid procedures, 405 in parathyroid procedures, 65 in other neck procedures, and 304 in adrenal procedures. In 884 of the endocrine procedures, the operating surgeon was a resident. The median experience of operating residents in endocrine procedures was 3.2 years (interquartile range 2.7-3.6) before the impact and 3.8 years (interquartile range 3.1-4.1) after it (p = 0.023). The monthly number of actual procedures with at least one resident participation in the Covid-19 period was significantly lower (8.7 ± 7.5 vs. 19.9 ± 3.7, p = 0.012) than the forecasted numbers. There were no semi-autonomous operating chief residents, although we expected a moderate level (0 actual vs. 0.5 ± 0.2 predicted, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

This study clearly represents sustainability in surgical training and includes usual trends. Essential endocrine surgical procedures the pandemic disrupted the most were the treatment of thyroid and parathyroid diseases. Covid-19 reduced our surgical volume and resulted in delays in training. A full-scale disaster plan is necessary for possible crises threatening surgical education.

A look at the global impact of COVID-19 pandemic on neurosurgical services and residency training

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has left an indelible effect on healthcare delivery and education system, including residency training. Particularly, neurosurgical departments worldwide had to adapt their operating model to the constantly changing pandemic landscape. This review aimed to quantify the reduction in neurosurgical operative volume and describe the impact of these trends on neurosurgical residency training.

Methods

We performed a comprehensive search of PubMed and EMBASE between December 2019 and October 2022 to identify studies comparing pre-pandemic and pandemic neurosurgical caseloads as well as articles detailing the impact of COVID-19 on neurosurgery residency training. Statistical analysis of quantitative data was presented as pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results

A total of 49 studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 12 (24.5%) were survey-based. The case volume of elective surgeries and non-elective procedures decreased by 70.4% (OR=0.296, 95%CI 0.210-0.418) and 68.2% (OR=0.318, 95%CI 0.193-0.525), respectively. A significant decrease was also observed in functional (OR=0.542, 95%CI 0.394-0.746), spine (OR=0.545, 95%CI 0.409-0.725), and skull base surgery (OR=0.545, 95%CI 0.409-0.725), whereas the caseloads for tumor (OR=1.029, 95%CI 0.838-1.263), trauma (OR=1.021, 95%CI 0.846-1.232), vascular (OR=1.001, 95%CI 0.870-1.152), and pediatric neurosurgery (OR=0.589, 95%CI 0.344-1.010) remained relatively the same between pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. The reduction in caseloads had caused concerns among residents and program directors in regard to the diminished clinical exposure, financial constraints, and mental well-being. Some positives highlighted were rapid adaptation to virtual educational platforms and increasing time for self-learning and research activities.

Conclusion

While COVID-19 has brought about significant disruptions in neurosurgical practice and training, this unprecedented challenge has opened the door for technological advances and collaboration that broaden the accessibility of resources and reduce the worldwide gap in neurosurgical education.

Health worker education during the COVID-19 pandemic: global disruption, responses and lessons for the future-a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis identified early evidence quantifying the disruption to the education of health workers by the COVID-19 pandemic, ensuing policy responses and their outcomes.

METHODS

Following a pre-registered protocol and PRISMA/AMSTAR-2 guidelines, we systematically screened MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, clinicaltrials.gov and Google Scholar from January 2020 to July 2022. We pooled proportion estimates via random-effects meta-analyses and explored subgroup differences by gender, occupational group, training stage, WHO regions/continents, and study end-year. We assessed risk of bias (Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies, RοB2 for randomized controlled trials [RCT]) and rated evidence certainty using GRADE.

RESULTS

Of the 171 489 publications screened, 2 249 were eligible, incorporating 2 212 observational studies and 37 RCTs, representing feedback from 1 109 818 learners and 22 204 faculty. The sample mostly consisted of undergraduates, medical doctors, and studies from institutions in Asia. Perceived training disruption was estimated at 71.1% (95% confidence interval 67.9-74.2) and learner redeployment at 29.2% (25.3-33.2). About one in three learners screened positive for anxiety (32.3%, 28.5-36.2), depression (32.0%, 27.9-36.2), burnout (38.8%, 33.4-44.3) or insomnia (30.9%, 20.8-41.9). Policy responses included shifting to online learning, innovations in assessment, COVID-19-specific courses, volunteerism, and measures for learner safety. For outcomes of policy responses, most of the literature related to perceptions and preferences. More than two-thirds of learners (75.9%, 74.2-77.7) were satisfied with online learning (postgraduates more than undergraduates), while faculty satisfaction rate was slightly lower (71.8%, 66.7-76.7). Learners preferred an in-person component: blended learning 56.0% (51.2-60.7), face-to-face 48.8% (45.4-52.1), and online-only 32.0% (29.3-34.8). They supported continuation of the virtual format as part of a blended system (68.1%, 64.6-71.5). Subgroup differences provided valuable insights despite not resolving the considerable heterogeneity. All outcomes were assessed as very-low-certainty evidence.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has severely disrupted health worker education, inflicting a substantial mental health burden on learners. Its impacts on career choices, volunteerism, pedagogical approaches and mental health of learners have implications for educational design, measures to protect and support learners, faculty and health workers, and workforce planning. Online learning may achieve learner satisfaction as part of a short-term solution or integrated into a blended model in the post-pandemic future.