BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate the exposure of Belgian residents in urology, general surgery, and gynecology to laparoscopic surgery and to training of laparoscopic skills in dedicated training facilities.MethodsThree similar specialty-specific questionnaires were used to interrogate trainees in urology, general surgery, and gynecology about their exposure to laparoscopic procedures, their acquired laparoscopic experience, training patterns, training facilities, and motivation. Residents were contacted via their Belgian specialist training organization, using Survey Monkey as an online survey tool. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics.ResultsThe global response rate was 58%. Only 28.8% of gynecology respondents, 26.9% of urology respondents, and 52.2% of general surgery respondents felt they would be able to perform laparoscopy once they had finished their training. A total 47% of urology respondents, 66.7% of general surgery respondents, and 69.2% of gynecology respondents had a surgical skills lab that included laparoscopy within their training hospital or university. Most training programs did not follow the current evidence about proficiency-based structured simulation training with deliberate practice.ConclusionBelgian resident training facilities for laparoscopic surgery should be optimized.

Background: Changing a curriculum raises the question whether the results, new curriculum student outcomes, are different from old curriculum student outcomes. Aims: To see whether different curricula produce different outcomes, we compared test and questionnaire results of two cohorts. We wanted to know if there is a difference on knowledge and skills test results, and on the number of times students practiced their skills during their final internships. Method: We used two validated test instruments: the Dutch Progress Test (PT) and the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). For reporting their skills practice, we asked students of both cohorts to fill out a basic skills questionnaire. Results: We found no significant difference between both cohorts on the results of their knowledge test and their report on skills practice. On the OSCE, students from the new curriculum cohort scored significantly higher than old curriculum students. Conclusion: Curriculum change can lead to improvements in graduating students' outcome results.

Learning intimate examinations with IEA's has a positive effect on the performance of medical students. This beneficial effect is on its turn reinforced during internships.

This study lends further credence to the evidence that portfolios can indeed adequately assess the different CanMEDS roles during clerkships, the health advocate role, which was less well represented in the portfolio content, excepted.

The findings promote integration of undergraduate medical curricula, and also offer a common framework and terminology for discussing what a European Bachelor of Medicine graduate can and cannot do, promoting mobility, graduate employability and patient safety.