↓ Skip to main content

Proficiency-based preparation significantly improves FES certification performance

Overview of attention for article published in Surgical Endoscopy, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Proficiency-based preparation significantly improves FES certification performance
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00464-018-6190-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angela A. Guzzetta, Joshua J. Weis, Sara A. Hennessy, Ross E. Willis, Victor Wilcox, Brian J. Dunkin, Deborah C. Hogg, Daniel J. Scott

Abstract

The Fundamentals of Endoscopic Surgery (FES) certification has recently been mandated by the American Board of Surgery but best methods for preparing for the exam are lacking. Our previous work demonstrated a 40% pass rate for PGY5 residents in our program. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a proficiency-based skills and cognitive curriculum for FES certification. Residents who agreed to participate (n = 15) underwent an orientation session, followed by skills pre-testing using three previously described models (Trus, Operation targeting task, and Kyoto) as well as the actual FES skills exam (vouchers provided by the FES committee). Participants then trained to proficiency on all three models for the skills curriculum and completed the FES online didactic material for the cognitive curriculum. Finally, participants post-tested on the models and took the actual FES certification exam. Values are mean ± SD; p < 0.05 was considered significant. Of 15 residents who participated, 8 (53%) passed the FES skills exam at baseline. Participants required 2.7 ± 1.3 h to achieve proficiency on the models and approximately 3 h to complete the cognitive curriculum. At post-test, 14 (93%, vs. pre-test 53%, p = 0.041) passed the FES skills exam. 14 (93%) passed the FES cognitive exam and 13/15 (87%) passed both the skills and cognitive exam and achieved FES certification. Our traditional clinical endoscopy curricula were not sufficient for senior residents to pass the FES exam. Implementation of a proficiency-based flexible endoscopy curriculum using bench-top models and the FES online materials was feasible and effective for the majority of learners. Importantly, with a modest amount of additional training, 87% of our trainees were able to pass the FES examination, which represents a significant improvement for our program. We expect that additional refinements of this curriculum may yield even better results for preparing future residents for the FES examination.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Researcher 2 9%
Librarian 1 5%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 4 18%
Unknown 8 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 36%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Computer Science 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 8 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 April 2018.
All research outputs
#14,979,439
of 23,041,514 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#3,609
of 6,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,774
of 329,169 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#66
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,041,514 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,111 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,169 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.