Defining characteristics of categorical general surgery resident lateral transfers.

IF 2.1 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open Pub Date : 2024-08-29 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1136/tsaco-2023-001333
Ava K Mokhtari, Marinda G Scrushy, Hassan Naser A Mashbari, Noelle N Saillant, Ryan Peter Dumas, Brittany K Bankhead
{"title":"Defining characteristics of categorical general surgery resident lateral transfers.","authors":"Ava K Mokhtari, Marinda G Scrushy, Hassan Naser A Mashbari, Noelle N Saillant, Ryan Peter Dumas, Brittany K Bankhead","doi":"10.1136/tsaco-2023-001333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong></p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Few studies describe rationales for intraspecialty ('lateral') general surgery (GS) resident program transfers.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to describe the key features of GS residency programs reporting lateral transfers, to characterize reasons behind transfer events, and to compare transferring resident skill sets against their new institutional peers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was administered in October 2020 to capture program features and demographic information of residents who transferred into or out of a GS residency program during a 5-year period. This survey was approved and distributed by the Association of Program Directors in Surgery to all participating GS program directors and coordinators. Survey responses were collected, and descriptive analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 69 program responses (21.5% survey response rate), 42 (61%) indicated the presence of any type of transfer event (in or out); 19 of 69 (27.5%) programs reported having at least one categorical GS resident transfer out, and 31 of 69 (44.9%) programs reported having at least one transfer in. Most transfer-out events (94.7%) were resident initiated, and the most commonly cited rationale was family obligation (78.9%). Most programs reported that residents who transferred in were on par with the existing resident cohort with respect to their medical knowledge, administrative abilities, and communication skills.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>GS transfers were not uncommon and most were resident initiated secondary to family obligations. The majority of transfer resident skill sets met institutional expectations by the time of graduation. Programs surveyed were content with their decision to accept transfer residents.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>III.</p>","PeriodicalId":23307,"journal":{"name":"Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open","volume":"9 1","pages":"e001333"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11367366/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2023-001333","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:

Background: Few studies describe rationales for intraspecialty ('lateral') general surgery (GS) resident program transfers.

Objective: We aimed to describe the key features of GS residency programs reporting lateral transfers, to characterize reasons behind transfer events, and to compare transferring resident skill sets against their new institutional peers.

Methods: A survey was administered in October 2020 to capture program features and demographic information of residents who transferred into or out of a GS residency program during a 5-year period. This survey was approved and distributed by the Association of Program Directors in Surgery to all participating GS program directors and coordinators. Survey responses were collected, and descriptive analyses were performed.

Results: Of 69 program responses (21.5% survey response rate), 42 (61%) indicated the presence of any type of transfer event (in or out); 19 of 69 (27.5%) programs reported having at least one categorical GS resident transfer out, and 31 of 69 (44.9%) programs reported having at least one transfer in. Most transfer-out events (94.7%) were resident initiated, and the most commonly cited rationale was family obligation (78.9%). Most programs reported that residents who transferred in were on par with the existing resident cohort with respect to their medical knowledge, administrative abilities, and communication skills.

Conclusion: GS transfers were not uncommon and most were resident initiated secondary to family obligations. The majority of transfer resident skill sets met institutional expectations by the time of graduation. Programs surveyed were content with their decision to accept transfer residents.

Level of evidence: III.

确定普外科住院医师横向转院的分类特征。
摘要: 背景:很少有研究描述专业内("横向")普外科住院医师项目转岗的原因:我们旨在描述报告横向转科的普外科住院医师培训项目的主要特点,描述转科事件背后的原因,并将转科住院医师的技能组合与新机构的同行进行比较:2020年10月进行了一项调查,以了解5年内转入或转出一般事务住院医师项目的住院医师的项目特点和人口统计学信息。该调查得到了外科项目主任协会的批准,并分发给所有参与的 GS 项目主任和协调员。我们收集了调查回复,并进行了描述性分析:在69个项目的回复中(调查回复率为21.5%),有42个项目(61%)表示存在任何类型的转出或转入事件;69个项目中有19个项目(27.5%)报告至少有一次GS住院医师分类转出事件,69个项目中有31个项目(44.9%)报告至少有一次转入事件。大多数转出事件(94.7%)都是住院医师主动提出的,最常引用的理由是家庭责任(78.9%)。大多数项目表示,调入的住院医师在医学知识、管理能力和沟通技巧方面与现有住院医师队列相当:结论:住院医师转岗并不罕见,大多数是住院医师因家庭责任而主动转岗。大多数转入住院医师的技能在毕业时都达到了院校的要求。接受调查的项目对接受转院住院医师的决定表示满意:证据等级:III。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.00%
发文量
71
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信