Training, certification and practice of cardiac and thoracic surgeons in Europe: a comparison of the members of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons.

BACKGROUND

There is little knowledge around the world about training and certification for general thoracic surgeons, and the relationship between thoracic surgery and cardiac surgery. Examination of the membership of European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) can clarify the training, practice and academic activity of European thoracic surgeons, as well as the similarities and differences between these two professional societies.

METHODS

A 38-item survey was designed to assess training, practice, demographics and relationships of general thoracic and cardiac surgeons in EACTS and ESTS.

RESULTS

A total of 447 respondents were tabulated from the EACTS (N=238) and ESTS (N=141) or both (N=68). As many as 33% of ESTS members were also members of EACTS, while 22% of EACTS members were members of both societies. ESTS members were younger but had similar numbers of female members (6% EACTS vs 9% ESTS). ESTS members self-designated as exclusive general thoracic surgeons (80%) compared with 33% of EACTS members (p<0.001), although 38% of EACTS members had practice patterns consistent with a dominant general thoracic practice. ESTS members are board certified in cardiac (29%) or thoracic surgery (83%) compared with 72% and 71% for EACTS members, respectively. ESTS members were more likely to perform oesophageal surgery as a significant portion of their practice (46% vs 26%, respectively, p<0.001). Median length of specialised cardiac and thoracic training was 4 years for both society memberships, although the median length of total surgical training was 1 year longer for EACTS members (6 vs 7 years). Practice in an academic setting and the number of peer-reviewed manuscripts was similar amongst memberships in both societies.

CONCLUSION

Members of EACTS and ESTS are very similar in length of training, board certification and academic practice and activity, although they have expected practice variation, given the different membership focus and demographics. Both societies provide important education and advocacy services for their members. Increased co-operation may further propagate improvements in cardiothoracic education and improve patient access and outcomes through shared specialty advocacy.