Presidential address, 1990. Should general surgery be redefined?

Area of Science:

• Surgery
• Medical Education
• Health Policy

Background:

• The 1983 definition by the Canadian Association of General Surgeons aimed to unify the specialty.
• Subspecialization trends in the 1980s prompted a re-evaluation of this definition.
• The original definition sought to enhance awareness of roles and prevent fragmentation.

Purpose of the Study:

• To assess the current practices of general surgeons in 1990.
• To evaluate the alignment between general surgeons' training and the established definition.
• To determine if the 1983 definition remains relevant.

Main Methods:

• Analysis of data from la Régie de l'assurance-maladie du Québec for practice patterns.
• A questionnaire survey sent to chairmen of 16 Canadian surgery departments regarding training.
• Comparative analysis of current activities against the 1983 definition.

Main Results:

• The current activities of general surgeons in 1990 diverged from the expectations set by the 1983 definition.
• Training adequacy varied, indicating a potential gap between the definition and practical skills.
• The existing definition was found to be outdated.

Conclusions:

• The 1983 definition of general surgery requires revision to reflect contemporary practice.
• A modified definition should incorporate primary and secondary components for flexibility.
• Head and neck surgery should be considered a secondary component of general surgery if revisions are made.