Introduction Online teaching has rapidly emerged as a viable alternative to traditional face-to-face education. How to teach surgical skills in the online environment, however, has not yet been fully established nor evaluated. Methods An international 1-day online surgical skills course consisting of lectures, pre-recorded virtual workshops, live demonstrations and along with surgical skills teaching in breakout rooms was organised. Based on existing learning theories, new methods were developed to deliver skills teaching online. Simultaneously, traditional in-person surgical skills teaching was also conducted and used as a benchmark. Skills development was assessed by trained demonstrators and self-reported competency scores were compared between the online and face-to-face event. Results 553 delegates from 20 different countries attended the online course. Of these, 64 were trained in breakout rooms with a 1:5 demonstrator-to-delegate ratio whilst the remaining 489 delegates participated in didactic skills development sessions. In a separate face-to-face course, 20 delegates were trained with traditional methods. Demonstrators rated the competency of delegates for suturing, tendon repair and vascular anastomosis. There was no significant difference in the competency ratings of delegates receiving online teaching or face-to-face teaching (p = 0.253, p = 0.084, p = 1.00, respectively). The development of the same skills to “articulation” were not different between formats (p = 0.841, p = 0.792, p = 1.00, respectively). Post course self-rated competency scores improved for all technical skills (p < 0.001). Small group sessions, both online and face-to-face, received higher satisfaction ratings compared to large group sessions in terms of clarity of instructions, answers to questions and demonstrator feedback. Overall feedback on teaching quality, however, was equivalent across both groups. Discussion Online teaching of surgical skills for early training years is an appropriate alternative to face-to-face teaching.

No abstract

Introduction Online teaching rapidly emerged as a viable alternative to traditional face-to-face education. However, how to teach surgical skills in the online environment has not been established nor evaluated yet. Method An international one-day online surgical skills course consisting of lectures, pre-recorded virtual workshops, live demonstrations, and surgical skills teaching in breakout rooms was organised. Simultaneously, a traditional face-to-face surgical skills teaching was held and used as benchmark. Skills development assessed by trained demonstrators and self-reported competency scores were compared between the online and face-to-face event. Results In total, 553 participants from 20 different countries attended the online course, 64 were trained in breakout rooms with a 1:5 demonstrator to candidate ratio whilst the remaining candidates participated in didactic skills development sessions. In a separate face-to-face course 20 candidates were trained with traditional methods. Post course competency ratings by demonstrators in suturing, tendon repair and vascular anastomosis were not significantly different between students receiving online breakout room or face-to-face teaching (ps&gt;0.05). The development of the same skills to “articulation” were not different between formats (ps&gt;0.05). Post course self-rated competency scores improved for all technical skills (p&lt;0.001). Small group sessions, both online and face-to-face, received higher satisfaction ratings compared to large group sessions in terms of clarity of instructions, answers to questions and demonstrator feedback. Conclusions Online teaching of surgical skills for early training years is an appropriate alternative to face-to-face teaching with the ability to define clear learning objectives, effectively teach surgical skills and achieve similar learning outcomes.

In the United Kingdom, colorectal carcinoma (CRC) is the third most prevalent and second most lethal cancer, accounting for 1 in 10 cancer deaths. To address this health burden, the NHS implemented a national screening programme to detect traces of blood in the stool of those at highest risk of CRCmen and women aged over 60. Preliminary data showed that the screening programme reduced CRC death by 16% overall and 23% in those who had returned their kit, highlighting the importance of patient engagement. Worryingly, recent data has indicated that engagement with the screening programme has begun to decline. Many GP surgeries are failing to achieve the 75% quota set by the Quality and Outcomes Framework, with London performing least favourably within the UK. To address this, we set up an educational intervention at a London GP practice, targeting misconceptions and anxieties associated with bowel screening and CRC in general, to assess whether this would improve patients' confidence in returning a stool sample as suggested by previous studies. Our results came to promising conclusions, but we remain cautious that our preliminary findings are subject to confounding influences which prevent conclusion of a causal relationship.