Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Objective Evaluation of a Multi-Component, Competitive, Selection Process for Admitting Surgeons into Higher Surgical Training in a National Setting

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Changing work practices make it imperative that surgery selects candidates for training who demonstrate the spectrum of abilities that best facilitate learning and development of attributes that, by the end of their training, approximate the characteristics of a consultant surgeon.

Aims

The aim of our study was to determine the relative merits of components of a program used for competitive selection of trainees into higher surgical training (HST) in general surgery.

Methods

Applicants (N = 98, males 69, mean age 31 years [range 29–40]) to the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland program for HST in general surgery between 2006 and 2008 were assessed. Clinical, basic surgical training, logbook, research performance, and reference scores were evaluated. A total of 51 candidates were shortlisted and completed a further objective assessment of their technical skills and interview performances.

Results

Shortlisted candidates performed better (p < 0.003) on all assessed parameters. Compared with candidates who were not selected for HST, those who were selected (N = 31) significantly outperformed on individual assessments and overall (p < 0.0001). Logistic regression analysis showed that clinical, technical skills, and research assessments, but not interview, predicted (92.2 %) HST selection outcomes.

Conclusions

Candidates selected for the national HST program in Ireland consistently outperformed those who were not. The assessments reliably and consistently distinguished between candidates, and all of the assessed parameters (except interview) contributed to a highly predictive selection model. This is the largest reported dataset from an objective, transparent, and fair assessment program for selection of the next generation of surgeons.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gallagher AG, O’Sullivan GC (2011) Fundamentals of surgical simulation: principles and practices. Springer, London

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bell RH Jr, Biester TW, Tabuenca A et al (2009) Operative experience of residents in US general surgery programs: a gap between expectation and experience. Ann Surg 249:719–724

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Pellegrini CA (2006) Surgical education in the United States: navigating the white waters. Ann Surg 244:335–342

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Darzi A, Smith S, Taffinder N (1999) Assessing operative skill. Needs to become more objective. BMJ 318(7188):887–888

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Beall DP (1999) The ACGME institutional requirements: what residents need to know. JAMA 281:2352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Pickersgill T (2001) The European working time directive for doctors in training. BMJ 323:1266

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bulstrode C, Pearson C, Hunt V (1998) Appointing doctors. Skills Unit Oxford, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  8. Rubin P (2007) Postgraduate medical education and training board (PMETB). Lancet 369:1341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Morris PJ (2003) Postgraduate medical education and training board (PMETB). Bull R Coll Surg Engl 85(5):148–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cuschieri A (1995) Whither minimal access surgery: tribulations and expectations. Am J Surg 169:9–19

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gallagher AG, Smith CD, Bowers SP et al (2003) Psychomotor skills assessment in practicing surgeons experienced in performing advanced laparoscopic procedures. J Am Coll Surg 197:479–488

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Chipman JG, Schmitz CC (2009) Using objective structured assessment of technical skills to evaluate a basic skills simulation curriculum for first-year surgical residents. J Am Coll Surg 209(364–370):e362

    Google Scholar 

  13. Derossis AM, Antoniuk M, Fried GM (1999) Evaluation of laparoscopic skills: a 2-year follow-up during residency training. Can J Surg 42:293–296

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gallagher AG, Lederman AB, McGlade K et al (2004) Discriminative validity of the minimally invasive surgical trainer in virtual reality (MIST-VR) using criteria levels based on expert performance. Surg Endosc 18:660–665

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Peters JH, Fried GM, Swanstrom LL et al (2004) Development and validation of a comprehensive program of education and assessment of the basic fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery. Surgery 135:21–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gallagher AG, Neary P, Gillen P et al (2008) Novel method for assessment and selection of trainees for higher surgical training in general surgery. Aust N Z J Surg 78:282–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Carroll SM, Kennedy AM, Traynor O et al (2009) Objective assessment of surgical performance and its impact on a national selection programme of candidates for higher surgical training in plastic surgery. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 62:1543–1549

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gallagher AG, Ritter EM, Satava RM (2003) Fundamental principles of validation, and reliability: rigorous science for the assessment of surgical education and training. Surg Endosc 17:1525–1529

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Irish Surgical Postgraduate Training Committee (2011). Standardised selection process for higher surgical training: guide to the marking system (B). Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland

  20. Halsted WS (1904) The training of the surgeon. Bull Johns Hopkins Hosp xv:267–275

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cameron JL (1997) William Stewart Halsted: our surgical heritage. Ann Surg 225:445–458

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Martin JA, Regehr G, Reznick R et al (1997) Objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS) for surgical residents. Br J Surg 84:273–278

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gallagher AG, Satava RM (2002) Virtual reality as a metric for the assessment of laparoscopic psychomotor skills: learning curves and reliability measures. Surg Endosc 16:1746–1752

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Beard JB, Marriott J, Purdie H et al (2011) Assessing the surgical skills of trainees in the operating theatre: a prospective observational study of the methodology. Health Technol Assess 15:1–162

    Google Scholar 

  25. Räder SB, Jørgensen E, Bech B et al (2011) Use of performance curves in estimating number of procedures required to achieve proficiency in coronary angiography. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 78:387–393

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. McPhee J, Wr Robinson, Eslami M et al (2011) Surgeon case volume, not institution case volume, is the primary determinant of in-hospital mortality after elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 53:591–599

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Nallamothu BK, Gurm HS, Ting HH et al (2011) Operator experience and carotid stenting outcomes in Medicare beneficiaries. JAMA 306:1338–1343

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. McClusky DA 3rd, Ritter EM, Lederman AB et al (2005) Correlation between perceptual, visuo-spatial, and psychomotor aptitude to duration of training required to reach performance goals on the MIST-VR surgical simulator. Am Surg 71:13–20 (discussion 20–11)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ritter EM, McClusky DA 3rd, Gallagher AG et al (2006) Perceptual, visuospatial, and psychomotor abilities correlate with duration of training required on a virtual-reality flexible endoscopy simulator. Am J Surg 192:379–384

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Conway JM, Jako RA, Goodman DF (1995) A meta-analysis of interrater and internal consistency reliability of selection interviews. J Appl Psychol 80:565–579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Latham GP, Saari LM, Pursell ED et al (1980) The situational interview. J Appl Psychol 65:422–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Crawford ME (2005) Commentary: reassuring evidence on competency based selection. BMJ 330:714

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The ASSERT (Application of Science to Simulation, Education and Research on Training) for Health Centre, School of Medicine, University College Cork, Brookfield Health Sciences Complex, College Road, Cork, Ireland

    Anthony G. Gallagher & Gerald C. O’Sullivan

  2. National Surgical Training Centre, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St. Stephens Green, Dublin 2, Ireland

    Anthony G. Gallagher, Gerald C. O’Sullivan, Paul C. Neary, Sean M. Carroll & Oscar Traynor

  3. Cork Cancer Research Centre, Biosciences Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland

    Gerald C. O’Sullivan

  4. Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, University of Connecticut Health Center, 263 Farmington Avenue, Farmington, CT, 06030, USA

    Gerald Leonard

  5. School of Psychology, University of Ulster, Derry, Northern Ireland, UK

    Brendan P. Bunting

Authors
  1. Anthony G. Gallagher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gerald C. O’Sullivan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul C. Neary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sean M. Carroll
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gerald Leonard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Brendan P. Bunting
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Oscar Traynor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anthony G. Gallagher.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gallagher, A.G., O’Sullivan, G.C., Neary, P.C. et al. An Objective Evaluation of a Multi-Component, Competitive, Selection Process for Admitting Surgeons into Higher Surgical Training in a National Setting. World J Surg 38, 296–304 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2302-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2302-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation