Factors influencing outcome of the American Board of Surgery Certifying examination: an observational study

BACKGROUND: Because of the content of the American Board of Surgery (ABS) certifying (oral) examination, there is a perception that those in some subspecialty surgical training programs at the time of the examination may have a lower pass rate. In addition, the format of the oral examination has prompted the use of specialized preparation such as "mock orals" and commercial courses. The purpose of this study was to correlate the pass rates on the ABS certifying examination with the practice status and methods of specialized preparation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey covering demographic information, type of surgical practice at the time of the examination, methods of preparation, and results of the examination was distributed to 1997 and 1998 graduates via a request to surgical residency program directors. RESULTS: One hundred one of 268 program directors supplied 717 names. There were 465 responses. Surveys distributed by the other 167 program directors resulted in an additional 81 responses. Four hundred ten (75%) of the respondents had taken the certifying examination. The total pass rate was 91%. There were no significant differences in the pass rate between those in private practice general surgery; those in academic general surgery; Thoracic, Vascular, or Plastic Surgery Fellows; those in other surgical fellowships; and those in the military or research. No significant differences in the pass rates were noted between those who prepared with formal mock orals, with informal mock orals, with a commercial course, with combinations of the three, and with no specialized preparation. CONCLUSION: Performance on the ABS certifying examination was not influenced by the candidate's practice status at the time of the examination. A substantial percentage of examinees either are exposed to or perceive the need to pursue specialized preparation for the examination, a behavior that in general produces good results.     

Career pathways of graduates of general surgery residency programs: an analysis of graduates from 1983 to 1990.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 1,000 individuals complete graduate surgical education in general surgery each year. Their subsequent career pathways have not been described but may have relevance to the supply of general surgeons available to provide a broad range of surgical care to the population of the USA. STUDY DESIGN: Data for this study were obtained from the American College of Surgeons's Surgery Resident Masterfile, developed for the annual Longitudinal Study of Surgery Residents, and the American Board of Medical Specialties's Official Directory of Board Certified Medical Specialists. For verification purposes, the American Medical Association's Physician Masterfile and the American Board of Surgery's certified database were searched. Yearly analyses of certified general surgery graduates from 1983 to 1990 were conducted, and rates of certification between US or Canadian medical school graduates and international medical school graduates (IMG) were compared. RESULTS: Ten to 18 years after completion of a residency program in general surgery, 93.6% of graduates had been certified in general surgery or by another American Board of Medical Specialties board. A total of 43.7% of the 8,068 graduates were certified, in addition, in a general surgery-based specialty. Overall, evidence of certification was not available for 6.4% of graduates. The certification rate for US or Canadian graduates was 95.8% of general surgeons and increased for IMG surgeons from 69.4% for 1983 graduates to 94.7% for 1990 graduates. The number of IMGs in general surgery residency programs declined from 19.7% of 1983 graduates to 7.8% of 1990 graduates. The rates of American Board of Surgery certification are 96.1% for male and 93.6% for female US or Canadian graduates; 79.2% of male IMG graduates and 83.7% of female IMG graduates became certified. CONCLUSIONS: Most surgeons who completed a general surgery residency program from 1983 to 1990 are certified and presumably have met high standards for knowledge and experience. More than half of the graduates specialize further.     

Surgical Resident Accuracy in Predicting Their ABSITE Score

Background:

The American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (ABSITE) is given to all surgical residents as an assessment tool for residents and their programs in preparation for the American Board of Surgery qualifying and certifying examinations. Our objective was to ascertain how well surgical residents could predict their percentile score on the ABSITE using two predictor measures before and one immediately after the examination was completed.

Methods:

A survey was given to surgical residents in postgraduate year(s) (PGY) 2 through 5 as well as to research residents in November and December 2011, and immediately after the examination in January 2012, to ascertain their predicted ABSITE scores. Thirty-one general surgery residents were measured consisting of PGY-2 (22%), PGY-3 (19.4%), PGY-4 (19.4%), and PGY-5 (12.9%), and research residents 25.8%.

Results:

Mean prediction scores were consistently higher than actual examination scores for both junior and senior examination takers, with senior examination predictions exhibiting the highest proportion of variation on the actual examination score. Stratified linear regression analysis showed little predictive significance of all 3 examination predictions and actual score, except for the senior examination predictions in November 2011 (t test = 2.521, P = .027). We found no statistically significant difference in the proportion of residents overestimating or underestimating their predicted score. Secondary analysis using a linear regression model shows that 2011 scores were a statistically significant predictor of 2012 scores (overall F = 13.258, P = .001, R² = 0.31) for both junior and senior examinations.

Conclusion:

General surgery residents were not able to accurately predict their ABSITE score; however, the previous year''s actual scores were found to have the most predictive value of the next year''s actual scores.     

A profile of female academic surgeons: training, credentials, and academic success

The objective of this study was to determine the profile (credentials, training, and type of practice) of female academic general surgeons and factors that influenced their career choice. A survey was sent to female academic surgeons identified through general surgery residency programs and American medical schools. The women had to be Board eligible/certified by the American Board of Surgery or equivalent Board and have an academic appointment in a Department of Surgery. Data were analyzed using the SPSS program. Two hundred seventy women (age range, 32-70 years) completed the survey (98.9% response rate). Fellowships were completed by 82.3 per cent (223/270), most commonly in surgical critical care. There were 134 (50.2%, 134/367) who had two or more Board certificates, most frequently (46%, 61/134) in surgical critical care. Full-time academic appointments were held by 86.7 per cent of women, most as assistant professors, clinical track; only 12.4 per cent were tenured professors. The majority of women described their practice as "general surgery" or "general surgery with emphasis on breast." The most frequent administrative title was "Director." Only three women stated that they were "chair" of the department. The top reason for choosing surgery was "gut feeling," whereas "intellectual challenge" was the reason they pursued academic surgery. When asked "Would you do it again?", 77 per cent responded in the affirmative. We conclude that female academic surgeons are well trained, with slightly more than half having two or more Board certificates; that most female academic surgeons are clinically active assistant or associate professors whose practice is "general surgery," often with an emphasis on breast disease; that true leadership positions remain elusive for women in academic general surgery; and that 77 per cent would choose the same career again.     

Thoracic surgery education--past, present, and future

Organized thoracic surgery education began with the establishment of the first thoracic residency program at the University of Michigan in 1928. Subsequent changes and progress in thoracic education have included the development of the American Board of Thoracic Surgery, the Thoracic Surgery Residency Review Committee, the Thoracic Surgery Directors' Association, the Matching Program, the In-Training Examination, and the Joint Council on Thoracic Surgery Education. Current challenges in thoracic surgery education include (1) the declining interest in medical school and especially in surgery and cardiothoracic surgery, (2) changing demographics of medical students and residents, (3) lifestyle of surgical residents and practicing surgeons, (4) changes in societal expectation, and (5) the need for better tools to assess the outcomes of surgical education and the continued competency of practicing surgeons. Despite the recent difficulty with job availability for finishing cardiothoracic residents, there is evidence that this is temporary and that there will be an increased need in the future. Recent changes by the American Board of Thoracic Surgery, including making optional American Board of Surgery certification, new pathways for entry into the cardiothoracic surgery educational process, and the recent development of a joint training proposal (4/3) by the American Board of Surgery and American Board of Thoracic Surgery, clearly signal the need for further changes in the cardiothoracic surgery educational process so that thoracic surgery remains relevant in the future care of patients with cardiovascular disease.     

American board of vascular surgery: the first 7 years

The American Board of Vascular Surgery (ABVS) was incorporated in 1996 with a vision of improved training standards and certification of vascular surgeons. At that time, 91% of those holding American Board of Surgery Certificates of Added Qualifications in Vascular Surgery supported the formation of the ABVS. Subsequent events have led to a clear definition of specific educational issues important to the vascular surgery community. Unresolved issues relate to the need to complete a general surgery residency before beginning a vascular surgery fellowship, the continued inclusion of vascular surgery as a primary component of general surgery training, and the absence of a designated Residency Review Committee for Vascular Surgery. These issues have persisted since the inception of the ABVS. An application for the ABVS to become an American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) primary board was submitted in 2002 with a preliminary hearing before a liaison committee composed of American Medical Association and ABMS members. The American Board of Surgery (ABS) and a minority of the vascular surgery community vigorously opposed the application. The perceived divisiveness created by their actions contributed to the application's initial rejection and the necessity for an appeal. Certain ABS directors have recently stated that they would consider approving multiple track-type training that could allow single certification in vascular surgery, following 5 to 6 years of postgraduate training after medical school. The ABVS cautiously supports this action, recognizing that this radical change for the ABS may not be feasible given the broad-ranging interests of general surgery and restrictive ABMS guidelines for certifying medical specialists. The impact of not resolving the critical issues facing vascular surgery in a timely manner is that there will be inadequate numbers of competent vascular surgeons to provide for society's needs. An independent ABMS-approved ABVS provides a clear opportunity to resolve the recognized failings of the status quo.     

The importance of vascular surgery training in a general surgery practice

The aim of this report was to document the practice of vascular surgery for graduates of 4 general surgery training programs.Graduating residents from 1991 to 1995 were surveyed by phone to document the number of reconstructive vascular and dialysis access procedures that they performed during the most recent 12 months. Those who pursued additional training beyond general surgery or who did not successfully complete the certifying examination of the American Board of Surgery (ABS) were excluded. In addition, the Resident Review Committee for Surgery (RRC-S) defined category report for these same general surgeons during their residency was examined.Fifty-five percent (26 of 47) of the board-certified general surgeons do either reconstructive or dialysis access vascular surgery. The average number of procedures in the RRC-S defined category for this cohort was 76. During the focused 12 months, 1986 vascular procedures were done by these 26 surgeons (76 cases per surgeon).In certain regions of this country, a significant volume of vascular surgery is done by general surgeons who have an ABS primary certificate alone. The technique of control and repair of major arteries and veins, the consequences of distal organ ischemia, reperfusion injury, thrombosis, and embolization are important anatomic and physiologic principles that must be taught in the curriculum to general surgeons, regardless of their future surgical careers. (Curr Surg 57:381-383. Copyright 2000 by the Association of Program Directors in Surgery.)     

An analysis of vascular surgical manpower requirements and vascular surgical rates in the United States

Inherent in any analysis of vascular surgical manpower must be accurate data on surgical rates and numbers of surgeons who perform vascular operations. For in-depth analysis of age-sex standardized vascular operative rates from 1979 to 1984 and a determination of current manpower levels, data from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) and the American Board of Surgery (ABS) were reviewed. During 1979 to 1984, total vascular surgical procedures increased 50%. In 1983 such operations comprised 11% of all general surgical procedures and 3% of all operations performed in this country. In 1983, 95,000 carotid endarterectomies, 74,000 peripheral bypasses, were performed. Through November 1984, among approximately 1600 surgeons who had applied to take the General Vascular Surgery Examination, 676 took the examination and 545 passed. What percentage of all vascular surgeons these 1600 represent is unknown. Consequently, what percentage of the total vascular operative load their own experiences represent is uncertain. As of May 1985, the Residency Review Committee for General Surgery had approved 42 fellowship positions in 29 vascular training programs. How these training figures will change to meet optimal manpower requirements remains undefined. Although data concerning operative rates have become more precise, forecasting manpower needs will be met with skepticism because of unknown current and future numbers of vascular surgeons and their average caseloads. Regardless of these uncertainties, vascular surgeons, program directors, and health analysts should be aware of such information because until we know how many vascular surgeons are necessary to provide optimal care, training and certification can not rationally evolve.     

The breeding and feeding of thoracic surgeons.

A brief recapitulation of the history of The American Board of Thoracic Surgery reveals that in its 27-year lifetime it has strived to improve the quality of thoracic surgical training. Most recently the Board has decided that candidates from unapproved programs who begin their training after June 30, 1976, will be ineligible for the Board examination. A population of approximately 2,000 thoracic surgeons should be more than adequate to provide patient care in the United Sates. At the present rate of certification the thoracic surgeon population would number about 4,000 within 25 years. With the birth rate in the United States nearing zero population growth, the number of new thoracic surgeons trained and certified each year must be limited, and it is imperative that the profession rather than the federal government be in control of this. Continuing education and evaluation of clinical competence will soon be required in the specialty of thoracic surgery. Cooperation among the major groups concerned with thoracic surgery is necessary for successful development of continuing education and the necessary evaluation of competence.     

Maintenance of certification: How to stay board certified by the American board of colon and rectal surgery

Achieving board certification is a milestone in the life of a young surgeon. The American Board of Colon and Rectal Surgery (ABCRS) Certifying Examination is considered the penultimate test of professional achievement for those who have completed an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) sanctioned general surgery and colorectal residencies followed by certification by the American Board of Surgery. The mission of the American Board of Colon and Rectal Surgery, incorporated as the American Board of Proctology in 1935, contemplates the establishment of standards and norms of knowledge by which physicians in the field of colon and rectal surgery are specifically measured to ensure the safety of the American public. These standards and requirements have changed over the long life of the American Board of Colon and Rectal Surgery, and staying current with requirements not only for achieving ABCRS certification, but for maintaining certification is important. The term “Maintenance of Certification” has recently been replaced by “Continuous Certification” and refers to a system of continuous assessment of common knowledge that every board certified colorectal surgeon should understand. In addition to demonstrating factual knowledge, a Board Certified colon and rectal surgeon should be able to demonstrate evidence of professionalism, provide evidence of commitment to lifelong learning, and demonstrate participation in activities that result in “practiced based improvement.” The purpose of this chapter is to specifically inform board certified colon and rectal surgeons of the procedures in place to stay certified. A brief history of board certification and data from other specialties on the impact of continuing certification is useful for context and provided.     

To define a specialty: A brief history of the American Board of Anesthesiology's first written examination

The initial written examination of the American Board of Anesthesiology, a division of the American Board of Surgery, was given on March 28, 1939. For all anesthesiologists, this date has double significance. First, what was meant by anesthesiology as a medical specialty was defined through the questions posed on the first examination. Second, the physicians being tested that day were among the first physician-anesthetists to exploit the newly created path to recognition as specialists in the science and art of anesthesia by the American medical hierarchy. Gaining the support of organized medicine was an involved and arduous struggle that consumed most of the 1930s. A triumvirate of visionaries, Paul Wood, John Lundy, and Ralph Waters, was necessary to crystalize the goal of specialty recognition of physician-anesthetists. The first written examination was the consummation of this dream of equal status for anesthesia. The examination would not become repetitious, and within the first decade of testing, the style would change from an essay format to multiple-choice questions similar to the current form.     

The initial examination for a Certificate of Added Qualifications in Surgery of the Hand

A total of 510 candidates took the 1989 Examination for Added Qualifications in Surgery of the Hand, including 412 diplomates of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery and ninety-eight diplomates of the American Board of Surgery. Most candidates reported that they had intensive practices in hand surgery and large annual case-loads, and most had taken a hand fellowship. However, there were significant differences between diplomates of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery and diplomates of the American Board of Surgery regarding these variables. The psychometric characteristics of the examination were very good. The average difficulty value was 77.6 per cent correct. The average item-discrimination value was high, and the total test reliability coefficient was 0.89. In general, the candidates' performance was very good, although there was a wide range in scores. A passing score of 66.3 per cent correct was selected, resulting in an over-all failure rate of 7.6 per cent, with 471 candidates passing and thirty-nine failing the examination. There were significant relationships between performance on the examination and several background variables, such as percentage of practice in hand surgery, having taken a hand fellowship, and size of the annual case-load.     

The examination assessment of technical competence in vascular surgery

BACKGROUND: The European Board of Surgery Qualification in Vascular Surgery is a pan-European examination for vascular surgeons who have attained a national certificate of completion of specialist training. A 2-year study was conducted before the introduction of a technical skills assessment in the examination. METHODS: The study included 30 surgeons: 22 candidates and eight examiners. They were tested on dissection (on a synthetic saphenofemoral junction model), anastomosis (on to anterior tibial artery of a synthetic leg model) and dexterity (a knot-tying simulator with electromagnetic motion analysis). Validated rating scales were used by two independent examiners. Composite knot-tying scores were calculated for the computerized station. The stations were weighted 35, 45 and 20 percent, respectively. RESULTS: Examiners performed better than candidates in the dissection (P<0.001), anastomosis (P=0.002) and dexterity (P=0.005) stations. Participants performed consistently in the examination (dissection versus anastomosis: r=0.79, P<0.001; dexterity versus total operative score: r=-0.73, P<0.001). Interobserver reliability was high (alpha=0.91). No correlation was seen between a candidate's technical skill and oral examination performance or logbook-accredited scores. CONCLUSION: Current surgical examinations do not address technical competence. This model appears to be a valid assessment of technical skills in an examination setting. The standards are set at a level appropriate for a specialist vascular surgeon.     

Guidelines for hospital privileges in vascular surgery and endovascular interventions: Recommendations of the Society for Vascular Surgery

The Hospital Privileges Practice Guideline Writing Group of the Society for Vascular Surgery is making the following five recommendations concerning guidelines for hospital privileges for vascular surgery and endovascular therapy. Advanced endovascular procedures are currently entrenched in the everyday practice of specialized vascular interventionalists, including vascular surgeons, but open vascular surgery remains uniquely essential to the specialty. First, we endorse the Residency Review Committee for Surgery recommendations regarding open and endovascular cases during vascular residency and fellowship training. Second, applicants for new hospital privileges wishing to perform vascular surgery should have completed an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited vascular surgery residency or fellowship or American Osteopathic Association-accredited training program before 2020 and should obtain American Board of Surgery certification in vascular surgery or American Osteopathic Association certification within 7 years of completion of their training. Third, we recommend that applicants for renewal of hospital privileges in vascular surgery include physicians who are board certified in vascular surgery, general surgery, or cardiothoracic surgery. These physicians with an established practice in vascular surgery should participate in Maintenance of Certification programs as established by the American Board of Surgery and maintain their respective board certification. Fourth, we provide recommendations concerning guidelines for endovascular procedures for vascular surgeons and other vascular interventionalists who are applying for new or renewed hospital privileges. All physicians performing open or endovascular procedures should track outcomes using nationally validated registries, ideally by the Vascular Quality Initiative. Fifth, we endorse the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission recommendations for noninvasive vascular laboratory interpretations and examinations to become a Registered Physician in Vascular Interpretation, which is included in the requirements for board eligibility in vascular surgery, but recommend that only physicians with demonstrated clinical experience in the diagnosis and management of vascular disease be allowed to interpret these studies.     

Preliminary assessment of a scientific curriculum in a surgical residency program.

A structured, basic science curriculum was instituted for surgical residents of the University of Connecticut (Farmington) Integrated Residency Program during the 1990-1991 academic year in concordance with American Board of Surgery guidelines. The impact of the new program was measured by comparing performance on monthly basic science examinations, the in-training examination, and "mock" oral examinations for the 1990-1991 academic year with that of the preceding academic year. While monthly examination scores improved for the entire group of residents (67.7 vs 64.6), in-training and oral examination scores did not change significantly. Categorical residents generally demonstrated superior performance and greater improvement than did preliminary residents. Data analysis suggested that the new curriculum was an effective educational device and that university-designed monthly examinations were valid testing instruments, but there was an apparent incongruity between the goals of the curriculum and the American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination.     

Continuing medical education activity and American Board of Surgery examination performance

BACKGROUND: Surgical knowledge is the basis of successful clinical problem solving, so is thought to be an important component of overall clinical ability. Continuing medical education (CME) reinforces basic knowledge and provides exposure to new knowledge within a field. Specialty board examination performance measures this knowledge but few studies have investigated a link between such performance and CME activity. This study assessed that link on the American Board of Surgery Recertification Examination. STUDY DESIGN: The study sample comprised 278 randomly chosen applicants for the 2000 examination. Study variables included practice type, career activity, age, gender, other Board certifications, examination attempts, community size, geographic region, nationality, and ethnicity. RESULTS: The study sample was remarkably similar to the total candidate cohort with regard to study variables. Of the 245 sample Diplomates who took the Recertification Examination, 10.2% failed. The Pass group reported 53% more total CME hours and 38% more Category I CME hours than the Fail group. The vast majority of Category I activities were surgical, clinical. Analyzed by quartiles of total CME hours, the failure rate was only 3.4% for the highest quartile but 25.8% for the lowest quartile. For Category I hours, respective failure rates were 4.8% and 19.4%. When further stratified by practice type, the failure rate of those in solo practice was 6% for those in the highest quartile of total CME hours and 37% for those in the lowest quartile. For Category I hours, the respective failure rates were 0% and 31%. CONCLUSIONS: There is a strong relationship between CME activity and performance on the American Board of Surgery Recertification Examination. Low CME activity and practice type appear to be independent risk factors for examination failure. The relationship of these findings to patient care outcomes has important implications.     

腹腔镜外科学基础认证项目简介及其对中国外科医师的意义

腹腔镜外科学基础（FLS）项目是普通外科中第1个经过验证的操作和认知考核项目.FLS由美国胃肠内镜外科医师协会（SAGES）开发并得到美国外科医学委员会（ABS）的支持.ABS要求所有拟参加普通外科医师执业资格考试前必须通过FLS考试.在美国,普通外科医师执业资格考试是取得执业资格的第一步.本文回顾了FLS项目在美国取得的成功经验,并就该项目在中国推广标准化腹腔镜外科技术中的应用和获益进行了介绍.     

Surgical coaching to achieve the ABMS vision for the future of continuing board certification

In February 2019, the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) released the final report of the Continuing Board Certification: Vision for the Future initiative, issuing strong recommendations to replace ineffective, traditional mechanisms for physicians’ maintenance of certification with meaningful strategies that strengthen professional self-regulation and simultaneously engender public trust. The Vision report charges ABMS Member Boards, including the American Board of Surgery (ABS), to develop and implement a more formative, less summative approach to continuing certification. To realize the ABMS’s Vision in surgery, new programs must support the assessment of surgeons’ performance in practice, identification of individualized performance gaps, tailored goals to address those gaps, and execution of personalized action plans with accountability and longitudinal support.Peer surgical coaching, especially when paired with video-based assessment, provides a structured approach that can meet this need. Surgical coaching was one of the approaches to continuing professional development that was discussed at an ABS-sponsored retreat in January 2020; this commentary review provides an overview of that discussion. The professional surgical societies, in partnership with the ABS, are uniquely positioned to implement surgical coaching programs to support the continuing certification of their membership. In this article, we provide historical context for board certification in surgery, interpret how the ABMS’s Vision applies to surgical performance, and highlight recent developments in video-based assessment and peer surgical coaching. We propose surgical coaching as a foundational strategy for accomplishing the ABMS’s Vision for continuing board certification in surgery.     

Problems facing vascular surgery in 2004

The most pressing challenges we face in the immediate future are endovascular training for those already in practice and a new educational paradigm for our residents. A number of avenues for training those in practice have been implemented, and newer methods, including computer simulation, are being explored. Vascular training programs should be 3 years in length, include vascular navigation and interventional skills, and follow 3 years of basic general surgical training. These changes in our resident training paradigm can take place only through two avenues: a successful reapplication to the American Board of Medical Specialties for an independent American Board of Vascular Surgery or a full reconfiguration of the training programs for general and vascular surgeons that would have to be spearheaded by the American Board of Surgery. There is skepticism that the latter could take place in the limited time we have left to make the vascular surgery residency attractive to candidates and sufficient in experiential and knowledge content.