Is current surgical training efficient? A national survey

Evaluation of surgical training in Denmark is competency based with no requirement for a specific number of procedures. This may affect monitoring of surgical progress adversely and cause an underestimation of the time needed to acquire surgical competencies. We investigated the number of common surgical procedures performed by trainees. Trainees' and consultants' expectations from the training program were also investigated.

A questionnaire was sent to all 115 surgical trainees in Denmark. We asked how many common surgical procedures the trainees had performed during their postgraduate training, whether self-reported procedural confidence was achieved during their training, and whether their training expectations were met. Another questionnaire dealt with the consultants' expectations of the surgical training.

The total number of common surgical procedures (Lichtenstein hernia repair, appendectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy) that were performed varied between trainees. One group performed few common procedures during training. A low number in 1 procedure correlated with a similar pattern in other procedures. Approximately one-third did not perform common elective procedures independently until their fifth year. Consultants and trainees viewed training differently.

Our study reveals no common trend in the numbers and types of procedures performed during training. The number of procedures seems to reflect the individual trainee and a local tradition rather than the particular training program. An informal competency-based assessment system with lack of quantitative requirements evidently involves a risk of skewness in training.