Evaluation of the Master's program: A SAGES pilot educational initiative.

Abstract

Background: High-quality program development in surgical education is essential for ensuring that training initiatives are both effective and scalable. Implementing such programs requires careful consideration of their long-term sustainability and impact on diverse clinical settings. The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) developed the Master's Program as a structured, competency-based online curriculum designed to provide high-quality continuing education for surgeons at various career stages. This study evaluates the pilot phase of the Master's Program, emphasizing its effectiveness in training surgeons while assessing its scalability and implementation challenges within surgical education frameworks.

Methods: A mixed-methods approach was used, combining qualitative and quantitative assessments. A purposive sample of U.S.-based surgeons was recruited through SAGES membership outreach and snowball sampling. Participants engaged in video-conferenced usability testing and completed the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) questionnaire. Data were collected via semi-structured interviews, which were analyzed using thematic analysis, while quantitative responses were evaluated using descriptive statistics.

Results: A total of 27 surgeons participated. Participant demographics: Of the 27 participants, 16 (59%) were practicing surgeons and 41% were trainees. Sixty-three percent of practicing surgeons were in community hospitals, and half had less than five years of experience. Participants rated the program highly in overall acceptability (mean: 4.7/5), confidence in applying the material (4.6/5), and ease of navigation (2.0/5 indicating low burden). Qualitative themes identified included content accessibility, navigational challenges, and recommendations for deeper, more advanced material for experienced surgeons.

Conclusions: The SAGES Master's Program demonstrated strong acceptability, particularly among early-career surgeons. While the modular, structured approach was well received, refinements are needed to better cater to advanced practitioners. To enhance adoption and scale this program, future iterations should focus on the planned expanded content depth, improved navigation, and institutional purchasing models to enhance adoption.