Jaffe Todd A, Hasday Steven J, Knol Meghan, Pradarelli Jason, Quamme Sudha R Pavuluri, Greenberg Caprice C, Dimick Justin B
The University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
The University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
J Surg Res. 2017 Oct;218:361-366. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2017.06.058. Epub 2017 Jul 22.
There exists a tension between surgical innovation and safety. The learning curve associated with the introduction of new procedures/technologies has been associated with preventable patient harm. Surgeon's perceptions regarding the safety of methods for learning new procedures/technologies are largely uncharacterized.
A survey was designed to evaluate surgeons' perceptions related to learning new procedures/technologies. This included clinical vignettes across two domains: (1) experience with an operation (e.g., colectomy) and (2) experience with a technology (e.g., laparoscopy). This study also focuses on a surgeon's perceptions of existing credentialing/privileging requirements. Participants were faculty surgeons (n = 150) at two large Midwestern academic health centers.
Survey response rate was 77% (116/150). 69% of respondents believed the processes of credentialing/privileging is "far too relaxed" or "too relaxed" for ensuring patient safety. Surgeons most commonly indicated a mini-fellowship is required to learn a new laparoscopic procedure. However, that requirement differed based on a surgeon's prior experience with laparoscopy. For example, to learn laparoscopic colectomy, 35% of respondents felt a surgeon with limited laparoscopic experience should complete a mini-fellowship, whereas 3% felt this was necessary if the surgeon had extensive laparoscopic experience. In the latter scenario, most respondents felt a surgeon should scrub in cases performed by an expert (38%) or perform cases under a proctor's supervision (33%) when learning laparoscopic colectomy.
Many surgeons believe existing hospital credentialing/privileging practices may be too relaxed. Moreover, surgeons believe the "one-size-fits-all" approach for training practicing surgeons may not protect patients from unsafe introduction of new procedures/technologies.
手术创新与安全之间存在矛盾。与引入新手术/技术相关的学习曲线与可预防的患者伤害有关。外科医生对学习新手术/技术方法安全性的看法在很大程度上尚未得到描述。
设计了一项调查以评估外科医生对学习新手术/技术的看法。这包括两个领域的临床案例:(1)手术经验(如结肠切除术)和(2)技术经验(如腹腔镜检查)。本研究还关注外科医生对现有资格认证/特权授予要求的看法。参与者是中西部两个大型学术健康中心的外科教员(n = 150)。
调查回复率为77%(116/150)。69%的受访者认为,为确保患者安全,资格认证/特权授予过程“过于宽松”或“宽松”。外科医生最常表示,学习新的腹腔镜手术需要小型进修。然而,这一要求因外科医生先前的腹腔镜检查经验而异。例如,对于学习腹腔镜结肠切除术,35%的受访者认为腹腔镜经验有限的外科医生应完成小型进修,而3%的受访者认为如果外科医生有丰富的腹腔镜经验则有必要这样做。在后一种情况下,大多数受访者认为外科医生在学习腹腔镜结肠切除术时应在专家主刀的手术中刷手上台(38%)或在带教老师的监督下进行手术(33%)。
许多外科医生认为现有的医院资格认证/特权授予做法可能过于宽松。此外,外科医生认为,对执业外科医生的“一刀切”培训方法可能无法保护患者免受新手术/技术不安全引入的影响。