伟大的辩论:未来的浪潮vs尝试和真实:外科综合培训vs普通外科培训之后的奖学金。

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
American Surgeon Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-21 DOI:10.1177/00031348251337168
Esteban Aguayo, Jacob Dixon, Jukes Namm, Peyman Benharash
{"title":"伟大的辩论:未来的浪潮vs尝试和真实:外科综合培训vs普通外科培训之后的奖学金。","authors":"Esteban Aguayo, Jacob Dixon, Jukes Namm, Peyman Benharash","doi":"10.1177/00031348251337168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Surgical training in the United States is undergoing a significant transformation, with a shift from the traditional model-general surgery followed by specialized fellowships-to integrated residency programs that offer early specialization. This shift has sparked debate over the impact on surgical competency, training efficiency, and outcomes. Proponents of integrated training highlight benefits such as earlier specialization, increased procedural volume, enhanced technical skills, and improved mentorship and research opportunities. However, critics argue that bypassing a comprehensive general surgery foundation can result in diminished surgical breadth, increased reliance on consultants, and decreased exposure to critical surgical experiences-potentially impacting both trainee development and general surgery programs. This manuscript explores the historical context, comparative advantages, and limitations of both training paradigms.</p>","PeriodicalId":7782,"journal":{"name":"American Surgeon","volume":" ","pages":"1594-1597"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Great Debates: The Wave of the Future vs Tried and True: Integrated Training in Surgery vs General Surgery Training Followed by Fellowship.\",\"authors\":\"Esteban Aguayo, Jacob Dixon, Jukes Namm, Peyman Benharash\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00031348251337168\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Surgical training in the United States is undergoing a significant transformation, with a shift from the traditional model-general surgery followed by specialized fellowships-to integrated residency programs that offer early specialization. This shift has sparked debate over the impact on surgical competency, training efficiency, and outcomes. Proponents of integrated training highlight benefits such as earlier specialization, increased procedural volume, enhanced technical skills, and improved mentorship and research opportunities. However, critics argue that bypassing a comprehensive general surgery foundation can result in diminished surgical breadth, increased reliance on consultants, and decreased exposure to critical surgical experiences-potentially impacting both trainee development and general surgery programs. This manuscript explores the historical context, comparative advantages, and limitations of both training paradigms.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Surgeon\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1594-1597\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Surgeon\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348251337168\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Surgeon","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348251337168","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国的外科培训正在经历一场重大的变革,从传统的普通外科再加上专业奖学金的模式,转变为提供早期专业化的综合住院医师项目。这种转变引发了对手术能力、培训效率和结果影响的争论。综合培训的支持者强调了诸如早期专业化、增加程序量、提高技术技能以及改善指导和研究机会等好处。然而,批评者认为,绕过全面的普外科基础可能会导致手术广度的缩小,对顾问的依赖增加,并减少对关键外科经验的接触,这可能会影响实习生的发展和普外科项目。本文探讨了两种培训模式的历史背景、比较优势和局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Great Debates: The Wave of the Future vs Tried and True: Integrated Training in Surgery vs General Surgery Training Followed by Fellowship.

Surgical training in the United States is undergoing a significant transformation, with a shift from the traditional model-general surgery followed by specialized fellowships-to integrated residency programs that offer early specialization. This shift has sparked debate over the impact on surgical competency, training efficiency, and outcomes. Proponents of integrated training highlight benefits such as earlier specialization, increased procedural volume, enhanced technical skills, and improved mentorship and research opportunities. However, critics argue that bypassing a comprehensive general surgery foundation can result in diminished surgical breadth, increased reliance on consultants, and decreased exposure to critical surgical experiences-potentially impacting both trainee development and general surgery programs. This manuscript explores the historical context, comparative advantages, and limitations of both training paradigms.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Surgeon
American Surgeon 医学-外科
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
623
期刊介绍: The American Surgeon is a monthly peer-reviewed publication published by the Southeastern Surgical Congress. Its area of concentration is clinical general surgery, as defined by the content areas of the American Board of Surgery: alimentary tract (including bariatric surgery), abdomen and its contents, breast, skin and soft tissue, endocrine system, solid organ transplantation, pediatric surgery, surgical critical care, surgical oncology (including head and neck surgery), trauma and emergency surgery, and vascular surgery.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信