Advertisement

Orthopedic Oncology Experience During Residency

  • Eric X. Jiang
  • Joel L. Mayerson
  • Thomas J. ScharschmidtEmail author
Article
  • 23 Downloads

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine the characteristics and logistics of orthopedic oncology rotations at various residency programs across the USA and determine the effect of orthopedic oncology rotations on Orthopedic In-Training Examination (OITE) scores. An eight-question survey was sent to 162 orthopedic surgery residency programs obtained from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education public database. Pre-oncology rotation and post-oncology rotation OITE scores for 24 residents at a major academic medical center were collected and analyzed. The response rate was 43.8%. Survey results were as follows: 90.1% responded positively to having a dedicated orthopedic oncology rotation in their curriculum; 49.3% carried out their oncology rotation at a hospital outside of their home institution; 70.4% of programs had only one dedicated orthopedic oncology rotation throughout residency; 42.3% indicated that residents experience 6–10 weeks of dedicated orthopedic oncology training during the 5-year residency program; 42.2% indicated that residents experience oncology rotations during post-graduate year 4; and 80.3% of programs had orthopedic oncology trained surgeons on their faculty. The mean increase in OITE oncology scores after the rotation was 12.1% (p = 0.005). There are variations in orthopedic oncology curricula across residency programs, most notably in the number of weeks residents participate in a dedicated oncology rotation, the post-graduate year that residents rotate on an oncology service, and the location where residents obtain their orthopedic oncology training. Participating in a dedicated orthopedic oncology rotation resulted in significant improvement in scores on the oncology domain of the OITE.

Keywords

Orthopedic surgery residency Oncology Resident education Orthopedic in-training exam OITE 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    White J, Toy P, Gibbs P, Enneking W, Scarborough M (2010) The current practice of orthopaedic oncology in North America. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:2840–2853CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hinds RM, Rapp TB, Capo JT (2018) Orthopedic oncology caseload among orthopedic surgery residents. J Cancer Educ 33:293–297CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education—Public Database. 2018Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Enneking WF (2000) An abbreviated history of orthopaedic oncology in North America. Clin Orthop Relat Res 374:115–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gil JA, Daniels AH, Weiss AP (2016) Variability in surgical case volume of orthopaedic surgery residents: 2007 to 2013. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 24:207–212CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    DiCaprio MR (2006) Oncology fellowships. Clin Orthop Relat Res 449:232–234PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Winterton M, Ahn J, Bernstein J (2016) The prevalence and cost of medical student visiting rotations. BMC Med Educ 16:291CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Likert R (1932) A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch Psychol 22:1–55Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Matson AP, Kavolus JJ, Byrd WA, Leversedge FJ, Brigman BE (2018) Influence of trainee experience on choice of orthopaedic subspecialty fellowship. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 26:e62–e67CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (2014) ACGME orthopaedic surgery case logs guidelines.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education: Orthopaedic surgery case logs: National Data Report; 2016–2017Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Blood TD, Gil JA, Born CT et al (2017) Variability in trauma case volume in orthopedic surgery residents. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 9:6967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gil JA, Waryasz GR, Owens BD, Daniels AH (2016) Variability of arthroscopy case volume in orthopaedic surgery residency. Arthroscopy. 32:892–897CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    DeFroda SF, Gil JA, Blankenhorn BD et al (2017) Variability in foot and ankle case volume in orthopaedic residency training. Foot Ankle Spec 10:531–537CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Surgeons AAoO. Is fellowship for me?Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Franklin CC, Bosch PP, Grudziak JS, Dede O, Ramirez RN, Mendelson SA, Ward WT, Brooks M, Kenkre T, Lubahn JD, Deeney VF, Roach JW (2017) Does a weekly didactic conference improve resident performance on the pediatric domain of the Orthopaedic in-training examination? J Pediatr Orthop 37:149–153CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wood DF (2003) Problem based learning. BMJ. 326:328–330CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    DiGiovanni BF, Gillespie BT, Flemister AS et al (2006) Using resident input to identify and integrate essential components of a foot and ankle rotation. Foot Ankle Int 27:728–733CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Karlen AI, Solberg EJ, Quanbeck DS, van Heest AE (2018) Orthopaedic surgery residency rotations and correlation with orthopaedic in-training examination performance. J Surg Educ 75:1325–1328CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    LaPorte DM, Marker DR, Seyler TM et al (2010) Educational resources for the Orthopedic In-Training Examination. J Surg Educ 67:135–138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association for Cancer Education 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric X. Jiang
    • 1
  • Joel L. Mayerson
    • 2
  • Thomas J. Scharschmidt
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.The Ohio State University College of MedicineColumbusUSA
  2. 2.Division of Musculoskeletal Oncology, Department of OrthopaedicsThe Ohio State University Wexner Medical CenterColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations