In:
British Journal of Surgery, Oxford University Press (OUP), Vol. 108, No. Supplement_7 ( 2021-10-27)
Abstract:
Operative cases recording is essential to demonstrate experience. However, indicative numbers may incentivise overstatement or misrepresentation of experience. This study aimed to determine the perceptions of eLogbook use by UK trainees. Methods An anonymous online questionnaire was disseminated electronically using a yield-maximization strategy. Mixed methods evaluation of quantitative and qualitative data was used. Based on the results of this survey, a modified Delphi process was conducted within the Council of the Association of Surgeons in Training to develop recommendations for eLogbook improvement. Results Analysis included 906 complete responses (34.8% female) from all UK specialities and all training grades. More than two-thirds (68.5%) believed that overstatement of case involvement occurs and almost a third (32.7%) had witnessed overstatement. A fifth (20.8%) witnessed trainees logging cases not participated in, yet few (15.1%) had raised such an issue with a supervisor. Feeling pressured to overstate involvement and number recorded was reported by more than a quarter (28.6% and 28.1%) of respondents. Almost a third (31.5%) felt that indicative case numbers were not achievable. Female trainees were less likely to feel well supervised (p = 0.022) and to perceive targets for training completion were achievable (p = 0.005). Thematic analysis identified four key themes to explain logbook misuse: Pressure to achieve training milestones; eLogbook functionality issues; training deficiencies and probity. Conclusions Inaccurate operative recording was widely reported, largely in response to perceived pressure to achieve career progression targets. Operative logbooks may not be as accurate as intended. Consensus recommendations are made for improvement in the eLogbook and its use.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
0007-1323
,
1365-2168
DOI:
10.1093/bjs/znab361.032
Language:
English
Publisher:
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Publication Date:
2021
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2006309-X
