Plenary2-03: DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL CORE CURRICULUM FOR THIRD YEAR MEDICAL STUDENTS IN SURGERY
Ranjan Sudan, MD1, Marc A DeMoya, MD2, Kimberly G Echert3, Linda M Barney, MD4, Patrice G Blair3, Kimberly M Brown, MD5, Andre R Campbell, MD6, Loretto Glynn, MD7, Celeste M Hollands8, Krashina M Husdon3, Stephen C Yang, MD9, Ajit K Sachdeva3; 1Duke University Medical Center, 2Medical College of Wisconcin, 3American College of Surgeons, Division of Education, 4Wright State University, 5Dell College of Medicine, 6University of California, San Francisco, 7Cadence Health, 8Texas Tech Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, 9Johns Hopkins Medical Center
OBJECTIVE(S): There is no national core curriculum in surgery for third year medical students. Therefore, the American College of Surgeons (ACS) and the Association for Surgical Education (ASE) embarked upon developing one. The needs-assessment data, determining its necessity and content, are reported here.
METHODS: A survey was initially vetted by physician educators and medical students from multiple institutions. It was then administered nationally to (1) medical students who had completed surgery clerkship, (2) surgery interns, and (3) leaders in surgical and non-surgical education to assess the need for a national curriculum. Curricular topics for inclusion were scored on a Likert scale from unnecessary (1) to essential (5).
RESULTS: Education leadership responses (N=225) represented 103 clerkship directors and 80 program directors, of which 43% were general surgeons, 17% were primary physicians, and the rest represented other specialists. Almost all clerkships (N=128, 93%) were offered at multiple sites, and 80% agreed or strongly agreed there was resultant variability across sites. The majority agreed (N=81, 64%) that a national curriculum would standardize the student experience. Most supported use of a centralized system to track student progress (N=87, 65%). To determine content, 28 topics were identified, of which 17 were scored as essential, with the topics of abdominal pain and abdominal masses rated as the most critical. The remaining topics, including transplant and ENT, were considered “good to know”. There was concordance between trainees (N=669) and educators. Based on the results of this survey, goals and objectives for essential topics and content to meet these objectives have been written and are available. The implementation of the curriculum is now being piloted in clerkships.
CONCLUSIONS: The need for a national core curriculum has been established, and requisite topics have been defined, goals and objectives as well as associated content has been written and is now available.