Appendectomy in the Training Program of General Surgery: Entrustable Professional Activity?

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY Annali italiani di chirurgia Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.62713/aic.3957
Anna Rossetto, Vittoria Morinelli, Davide Muschitiello, Rosanna Quattrin, Giovanni Terrosu, Vittorio Bresadola
{"title":"Appendectomy in the Training Program of General Surgery: Entrustable Professional Activity?","authors":"Anna Rossetto, Vittoria Morinelli, Davide Muschitiello, Rosanna Quattrin, Giovanni Terrosu, Vittorio Bresadola","doi":"10.62713/aic.3957","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The training of medical specialists is a decisive issue for the quality of medical practice. Autonomization in simple procedures and applying the peer education concept seem promising, particularly for general surgery. With this work, we wanted to assess whether there are differences between appendectomy operations performed by differently composed teams with the active involvement of resident doctors at a university centre.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed the laparotomies and laparoscopic appendicectomies carried out at the Udine Surgery Clinic over a period of 10 years. The interventions were divided into groups according to the experience of the surgical team that performed them: G1 (consultant), G2 (senior resident + consultant), G3 (junior resident + consultant), and G4 (junior resident + senior resident).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>510 appendectomy procedures were considered for the present analysis. 214 (42.0%) were performed by G1, 139 (27.3%) by G2, 79 (15.5%) by G3 and 78 (15.3%) by G4 group. No difference between the groups was shown in terms of complications, reinterventions, readmissions, length of stay, and duration of surgery. A statistically significant difference was shown in the age of the observed population with respect to the degree of experience of the surgical teams: younger patients were mainly operated on by more experienced teams, and in particular, pediatric laparoscopic appendectomy was performed mainly by consultants.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Appendectomy surgery can be performed by teams with varying levels of experience and is an example of an activity that can be used in Peer Education. It allows for the empowerment of younger residents and the autonomization of older residents in maintaining a medically, ethically, and legally correct standard of safe clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":8210,"journal":{"name":"Annali italiani di chirurgia","volume":"96 2","pages":"269-276"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annali italiani di chirurgia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.62713/aic.3957","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The training of medical specialists is a decisive issue for the quality of medical practice. Autonomization in simple procedures and applying the peer education concept seem promising, particularly for general surgery. With this work, we wanted to assess whether there are differences between appendectomy operations performed by differently composed teams with the active involvement of resident doctors at a university centre.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the laparotomies and laparoscopic appendicectomies carried out at the Udine Surgery Clinic over a period of 10 years. The interventions were divided into groups according to the experience of the surgical team that performed them: G1 (consultant), G2 (senior resident + consultant), G3 (junior resident + consultant), and G4 (junior resident + senior resident).

Results: 510 appendectomy procedures were considered for the present analysis. 214 (42.0%) were performed by G1, 139 (27.3%) by G2, 79 (15.5%) by G3 and 78 (15.3%) by G4 group. No difference between the groups was shown in terms of complications, reinterventions, readmissions, length of stay, and duration of surgery. A statistically significant difference was shown in the age of the observed population with respect to the degree of experience of the surgical teams: younger patients were mainly operated on by more experienced teams, and in particular, pediatric laparoscopic appendectomy was performed mainly by consultants.

Conclusions: Appendectomy surgery can be performed by teams with varying levels of experience and is an example of an activity that can be used in Peer Education. It allows for the empowerment of younger residents and the autonomization of older residents in maintaining a medically, ethically, and legally correct standard of safe clinical practice.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
普通外科培训计划中的阑尾切除术:可信赖的专业活动?
目的:医学专科医生的培养是决定医疗质量的关键问题。简单手术的自主化和同伴教育概念的应用似乎很有前景,尤其是在普通外科手术中。通过这项工作,我们想评估在大学中心住院医生的积极参与下,由不同组成的团队进行的阑尾切除术手术之间是否存在差异。方法:回顾性分析10年来在乌迪内外科诊所进行的剖腹手术和腹腔镜阑尾切除术。根据手术团队的经验将干预措施分为G1(会诊医师)、G2(高级住院医师+会诊医师)、G3(初级住院医师+会诊医师)和G4(初级住院医师+高级住院医师)。结果:本分析考虑了510例阑尾切除术。G1组214例(42.0%),G2组139例(27.3%),G3组79例(15.5%),G4组78例(15.3%)。在并发症、再干预、再入院、住院时间和手术持续时间方面,两组之间没有差异。在观察人群的年龄方面,手术团队的经验程度差异有统计学意义:年轻患者主要由经验更丰富的团队进行手术,特别是儿科腹腔镜阑尾切除术主要由顾问进行手术。结论:阑尾切除术可以由不同经验水平的团队进行,并且是可以在同伴教育中使用的活动的一个例子。它允许年轻的住院医生和老年住院医生在保持医学上,道德上和法律上正确的安全临床实践标准方面的自主权。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
116
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Annali Italiani di Chirurgia is a bimonthly journal and covers all aspects of surgery:elective, emergency and experimental surgery, as well as problems involving technology, teaching, organization and forensic medicine. The articles are published in Italian or English, though English is preferred because it facilitates the international diffusion of the journal (v.Guidelines for Authors and Norme per gli Autori). The articles published are divided into three main sections:editorials, original articles, and case reports and innovations.
期刊最新文献
Deep Learning-Based Videomics for Automatic Segmentation in Endoscopic Endonasal Surgery. Implications of Glomus Tumor Pathology and Pain Mechanism for Surgical Treatment. Effects of PDCA Cycle-Guided Individualized Evidence-Based Nursing on Functional Recovery and Quality of Life After Intracerebral Hemorrhage Surgery. Application of a Self-Made Negative Pressure Suction-Assisted Device in Micro-Channel Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy. Outcomes of Laparoscopic Radical Dissection in Gastric Cancer Patients Based on the Systematic Mesogastric Excision Concept: A Retrospective Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1