Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Concerns persist about the effect of current duty hour reforms on resident educational outcomes. We investigated whether a flexible, less-restrictive duty hour policy (Flexible Policy) was associated with differential general surgery examination performance compared with current ACGME duty hour policy (Standard Policy). STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:We obtained examination scores on the American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination, Qualifying Examination (written boards), and Certifying Examination (oral boards) for residents in 117 general surgery residency programs that participated in the Flexibility in Duty Hour Requirements for Surgical Trainees (FIRST) Trial. Using bivariate analyses and regression models, we compared resident examination performance across study arms (Flexible Policy vs Standard Policy) for 2015 and 2016, and 1 year of the Qualifying Examination and Certifying Examination. Adjusted analyses accounted for program-level factors, including the stratification variable for randomization. RESULTS:In 2016, FIRST trial participants were 4,363 general surgery residents. Mean American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination scores for residents were not significantly different between study groups (Flexible Policy vs Standard Policy) overall (Flexible Policy: mean [SD] 502.6 [100.9] vs Standard Policy: 502.7 [98.6]; p = 0.98) or for any individual postgraduate year level. There was no difference in pass rates between study arms for either the Qualifying Examination (Flexible Policy: 90.4% vs Standard Policy: 90.5%; p = 0.99) or Certifying Examination (Flexible Policy: 86.3% vs Standard Policy: 88.6%; p = 0.24). Results from adjusted analyses were consistent with these findings. CONCLUSIONS:Flexible, less-restrictive duty hour policies were not associated with differences in general surgery resident performance on examinations during the FIRST Trial. However, more years under flexible duty hour policies might be needed to observe an effect.

BACKGROUND:Surgical site infections (SSIs) cause significant patient morbidity and increase costs. This work prospectively examines our institutional effort to reduce SSIs through a resident-driven quality initiative. METHODS:A general surgery resident-championed, evidenced-based care bundle for patients undergoing colorectal surgery at a single academic institution was developed using attending mentorship. National Surgical Quality Improvement Program definitions for SSIs were used. Data were collected prospectively and bundle compliance was monitored using a checklist. The primary outcome compared SSIs before and after implementation. RESULTS:In the 2 years preceding standardization, 489 colorectal surgery cases were performed. SSIs occurred in 68 patients (13.9% SSI rate). Following implementation of the bundle, 212 cases were performed with 10 SSIs (4.7% SSI rate, P < .01). Multivariate logistic regression analysis found a decrease in superficial and overall SSIs (odds ratio .17, 95% confidence interval .05 to .59; odds ratio .31, 95% confidence interval .14 to .68). CONCLUSIONS:These data demonstrate that resident-driven initiatives to improve quality of care can be a swift and effective way to enact change. We observed significantly decreased SSIs with a renewed focus on evidence-based, standardized patient care.