R. M. Minter1, B. D. Schirmer2, R. Rosenthal3, M. Arregui4, L. Swanstrom5 1University Of Michigan,Surgery,Ann Arbor, MI, USA 2University Of Virginia,Surgery,Charlottesville, VA, Virgin Islands, U.S. 3Cleveland Clinic Florida,Surgery,Weston, FL, USA 4Nagan, Arregui, And Davis, MD Inc,Surgery,Indianapolis, IN, USA 5The Oregon Clinic,Surgery,Portland, OR, USA
Objective: Evaluate the impact of Fellowship Council(FC) accredited Hepatopancratobiliary(HPB) and Advanced GI Minimally Invasive Surgery(GIMIS) fellowships on General Surgery resident case experience.
Methods: HPB(n=12) and GIMIS(n=53) fellow case volume data were quantified in programs with affiliated residencies 2010-2012. Using ACGME chief resident defined category data for the residencies affiliated with these fellowships, liver and pancreas experience was quantified in programs with HPB fellowships, and basic laparoscopy, complex laparoscopy, upper endoscopy(UEND), and colonoscopy experience in programs with GIMIS fellows. Resident data were benchmarked against national standards.
Results: Data are derived from 12/16(75%) HPB and 53/60(88%) GIMIS FC accredited fellowships. Comparative data for resident performance in institutions with HPB and GIMIS fellowships are shown in the Table. Median UEND and colonoscopy volumes for 2010-12 were 43 and 54 for residents (national average 48.4 UEND; 65 colonoscopy), and 55 and 1 for GIMIS fellows.
Conclusions: HPB fellowships do not have a deleterious impact on affiliated General Surgery residents’ liver and pancreas experience, and resident endoscopy experience is not threatened by the presence of a GIMIS fellow. Resident case volumes in institutions with GIMIS fellows are comparable to the national average within the ACGME complex laparoscopy domain, but lower within the basic laparoscopy domain. As GIMIS fellows are performing few basic laparoscopic cases, this is most likely due to fewer cases being performed in these institutions versus fellow impact.
