No abstract

Background The principles of global surgery should be taught as a part of the core curriculum in medical schools. The need for medical students to be familiar with the topic is increasing in acceptance. There is, however, a paucity of data on how medical students are exposed to global surgery. This study aims to evaluate exposure of medical students to global surgery, awareness of the key messages of the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery, global surgery career aspirations and barriers to said aspirations. Methods ISOMERS was a multi-centre, online, cross-sectional survey of final year medical students globally. The questionnaire utilised a combination of Likert-scale, multiple-choice, and free text questions. Results In this study, 1593 final year medical students from 144 medical schools in 20 countries participated. The majority (n = 869/1496, 58.1%) believed global surgery to be relevant, despite 17.7% (n = 271/1535) having any exposure to global surgery. Most participants (n = 1187/1476, 80.4%) wanted additional resources on global surgery. Difficulty in providing appropriate care for patients living abroad (n = 854/1242, 68.8%) was the most common perceived barrier to a career in global surgery. Conclusions Participants believed global surgery was a relevant topic for medical students and wanted additional resources that they could access on global surgery. It is critical for medical students to become aware that global surgery is a field that aims to address inequity in surgical care not just internationally, but nationally and locally as well.

No abstract

No abstract

Background The Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) has been shown to reduce perioperative complications across global health systems. We sought to assess perceptions of the SSC and suggestions for its improvement among medical students, trainees, and early career providers. Methods From July to September 2019, a survey assessing perceptions of the SSC was disseminated through InciSioN, the International Student Surgical Network comprising medical students, trainees, and early career providers pursuing surgery. Individuals with ≥2 years of independent practice after training were excluded. Respondents were categorized according to any clinical versus solely non‐clinical SSC exposure. Logistic regression was used to evaluate associations between clinical/non‐clinical exposure and promoting future use of the SSC, adjusting for potential confounders/mediators: training level, human development index, and first perceptions of the SSC. Thematic analysis was conducted on suggestions for SSC improvement. Results Respondent participation rate was 24%. Three hundred and eighteen respondents were included in final analyses; 215 (67%) reported clinical exposure and 190 (60%) were promoters of future SSC use. Clinical exposure was associated with greater odds of promoting future SSC use (aOR 1.81 95% CI [1.03–3.19], p = 0.039). A greater proportion of promoters reported “Improved Operating Room Communication” as a goal of the SSC (0.21 95% CI [0.15–0.27]‐vs.‐0.12 [0.06–0.17], p = 0.031), while non‐promoters reported the SSC goals were “Not Well Understood” (0.08 95% CI [0.03–0.12]‐vs.‐0.03 [0.01–0.05], p = 0.032). Suggestions for SSC improvement emphasized context‐specific adaptability and earlier formal training. Conclusions Clinical exposure to the SSC was associated with promoting its future use. Earlier formal clinical training may improve perceptions and future use among medical students, trainees, and early career providers.

No abstract

No abstract

Background International Student Surgical Network (InciSioN) is the largest student and trainee global surgery interest group worldwide and its members have contributed significantly to global surgery research. The InciSioN Research Capacity-Building (IReCaB) program aimed to enhance the research skills and confidence of participants via a peer mentorship model. Methods After an open call to members of InciSioN to enroll, participants’ knowledge of research methods and the process was evaluated through a test to assign mentor and mentee roles, with mentors being those who scored ≥ 20/25. Mentors then delivered a series of four webinars to help disseminate research methodology to mentees. Finally, mentees were tested on their knowledge of research and their satisfaction with the program was also evaluated. Results Fifty-two participants, mostly from LMICs (n = 23/52, 44.2%) were enrolled, and 36 completed the program. There was a significant improvement in the proportion of questions answered correctly on the post-program test (R = 0.755, p < 0.001). Post-IReCaB test scores were greater than pre-IReCaB scores (p < 0.001). The difference in confidence after the course was also significant (p < 0.001). IReCaB participants successfully designed, implemented, and published an international cross-sectional study. Conclusion This study showed improvements in participants’ understanding of theoretical components of scientific research. We offer a model for research capacity building that can be implemented, modeled, and further refined by similar organizations with academic research goals.