Ko C Y, Whang E E, Longmire W P, McFadden D W
University of California, Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, California 90095, USA.
J Surg Res. 2000 Jun 1;91(1):5-8. doi: 10.1006/jsre.2000.5855.
Although numerous important contributions have originated from basic science research performed by surgeons, it seems that such dedicated work is becoming increasingly difficult to accomplish. What are the reasons for this change and what improvements can be made? This study aims to characterize the basic research training and careers of senior academic surgeons to assess and devise strategies for sustaining productive and quality surgical research.
A 25-item survey was sent to 850 senior-level members of academic societies, including the Association of Academic Surgeons, Society of University Surgeons, and American Surgical Association. It addressed each surgeon's clinical and research training and career, as well as opinions concerning surgical research.
Three hundred seventy-seven (44%) surveys were received. Mean age was 64 years, and 73% were full professors. Seventy-two percent of respondents performed basic science research during training, and for 71% of this group, research was a significant reason for choosing a clinical specialty. Ninety-one percent performed research in the same specialty area during and after training. Of those who performed research during training, a full 99% continued to perform research on completion of training. However, 38% stopped performing basic research by age 39. Seventeen and twenty-three percent stopped basic research between 40 and 49 and between 50 and 59 years of age, respectively. The most common factors causing them to stop were increased clinical load (40%) and increased administrative duties (38%). For respondents who had stopped research prior to age 40, 73% cited increased clinical load as the primary reason. Eighty-five percent felt a dedicated research period should be included in surgery training.
Most respondents had participated in basic research during training, and continued similar research after training. However, an overwhelming clinical practice at the junior faculty level seemed to hinder research. We conclude: (1) the majority consensus is that research training is integral to the development of academic surgeons; (2) such research training opportunities appear adequate; however, (3) faculty performing research, particularly at the junior level, need to be better protected from other academic duties, such as clinical practice and administration. The challenge to the leadership of academic surgery will be to enhance such research productivity in the context of increasing academic demands.
尽管外科医生开展的基础科学研究取得了众多重要成果，但此类专门工作似乎越来越难以完成。这种变化的原因是什么，又能做出哪些改进？本研究旨在描述资深学术外科医生的基础研究培训和职业发展情况，以评估并制定维持高效且高质量外科研究的策略。
向850名学术团体的高级成员发送了一份包含25个项目的调查问卷，这些团体包括学术外科医生协会、大学外科医生协会和美国外科协会。问卷涉及每位外科医生的临床和研究培训及职业发展，以及对外科研究的看法。
共收到377份（44%）调查问卷。平均年龄为64岁，73%为正教授。72%的受访者在培训期间进行基础科学研究，其中71%的人表示研究是他们选择临床专科的重要原因。91%的人在培训期间及之后都在同一专科领域开展研究。在培训期间进行研究的人中，99%在培训结束后仍继续从事研究。然而，38%的人在39岁时就停止了基础研究。分别有17%和23%的人在40至49岁以及50至59岁之间停止了基础研究。导致他们停止研究的最常见因素是临床工作量增加（40%）和行政职责增多（38%）。对于在40岁之前停止研究的受访者，73%将临床工作量增加作为主要原因。85%的人认为外科培训中应包含专门的研究阶段。
大多数受访者在培训期间参与了基础研究，并在培训后继续进行类似研究。然而，初级教员层面繁重的临床工作似乎阻碍了研究。我们得出以下结论：（1）多数人一致认为研究培训是学术外科医生发展不可或缺的一部分；（2）此类研究培训机会似乎充足；然而，（3）从事研究的教员，尤其是初级教员，需要更好地从临床实践和行政等其他学术职责中解脱出来。学术外科领导层面临的挑战将是在学术要求不断提高的背景下提高此类研究的生产力。
