Key result
Inspection and accreditation by the Specialist Advisory Committee reduced mean deficiencies in required surgical training standards from 14.8% to 8.9%.
Why the study?
Does inspection and accreditation by the Specialist Advisory Committee improve adherence to required standards in orthopaedic surgical training?
Population
7 training regions with 109 hospitals and 433 Specialist Registrars in orthopaedic surgery and trauma
Comparison
Inspection and accreditation by the Specialist… vs Initial assessment (pre-inspection)
Design
Other
Follow-up
2 years
Authors
Loading...
Supports on-site accreditation to cut training deficiencies in orthopaedics; leaves open effects on trainee competence and patient outcomes.
Observational (n=433)
Yes
Does inspection and accreditation by the Specialist Advisory Committee improve adherence to required standards in orthopaedic surgical training?
Absolute Event Rate: 8.9% vs 14.8%
Direct on-site inspection and accreditation of surgical training programs reduces deficiencies in required standards.
Jain et al. (2005) conducted an observational in Higher surgical training in orthopaedic surgery and trauma (n=433). Inspection and accreditation by the Specialist Advisory Committee vs. Initial assessment (pre-inspection) was evaluated on Deficiencies in required standards. Inspection and accreditation by the Specialist Advisory Committee reduced mean deficiencies in required surgical training standards from 14.8% to 8.9%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: