What it takes to become an orthopaedic surgeon: A comparison of orthopaedic surgical training programmes in 10 countries focusing on structure and fellowship requirements.

Int J Surg

BG Klinikum, Unfallkrankenhaus Berlin, Germany Kellogg College, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom Department of orthopedic surgery, Department of Health Management and Health Economics, Akershus University hospital and Institute of Health and Society, University Oslo, OSLO, Norway Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Department of Spine Surgery, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Strasbourg, France Department of Traumatology, University medicine, Universitätsmedizin Greifswald, University Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany University of Newcastle, District Clinical Director of Surgery; Clinical Lead, Quality & Innovation - Central Coast Local Health District, Graduate Programs in Surgical Education -University of Melbourne, Australia Department of Surgery, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.

Published: November 2021

Background: The quality of surgical training has been highlighted as one of the most important patient safety issues in the future. Training surgeons and supporting them to do their best should be considered integral in providing optimum and safe care for the individual patient and the best possible return on investment in training medical professionals. In 2011, an international consensus statement defined fundamental principles for surgical training.

Purpose: This study examines orthopaedic surgical training to explore the similarities and differences in the requirements for trainees to obtain board certification in ten countries.

Methods: Countries of the Commonwealth Health Care Comparison: Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Norway and Switzerland were chosen to be compared. The relevant information was extracted from official information from authorities and administrative bodies.

Results: The study revealed significant differences in duration, organisation and assessment of training. So-called "competency-based" training is not featured in every country, and the manner of its implementation is variable. In particular, the numbers in surgical cases required to be accredited varies by country ranging from 1260 (UK) to 340 (Norway).

Conclusion: Despite the recommendation in 2011 for some degree of uniformity across surgical training in industrialised countries, evidence suggests wide variation in the training programmes which is likely to be a concern in both quality of training as well as present and future patient safety.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106150DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

surgical training
16
training
10
orthopaedic surgical
8
training programmes
8
patient safety
8
surgical
6
takes orthopaedic
4
orthopaedic surgeon
4
surgeon comparison
4
comparison orthopaedic
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!