Surgical Scientist training program

[Guest Kirsteen]

Hi there,

 

I was in a meeting with a number of surgeons last night, one of whom is in her general surgery residency here at UofT. She is currently participating in UofT's Surgical Scientist training program (SSTP) and although I knew a little bit about the program, she mentioned a few more details which sounded really interesting.

 

Apparently the UofT program now allows surgical residents to pursue one of three types of graduate degrees (Masters or Doctorate, the latter if you'd like to further your Masters research, which is what she has chosen to do) in the SSTP. Historically, many of the SSTP students pursued a basic science graduate degree. Now, however, three graduate training options are now available in: 1) basic sciences; 2) clinical epidemiology; 3) education. The first two are fairly well known options, but the third may not be as well known. Apparently, for the first year, the student takes a complement of courses at UofT's teaching college (OISE) and the following year consists of the completion of a thesis in education. Neat for those interested in education.

 

Cheers,

Kirsteen

[Guest UWOMED2005]

I think pretty much every surgery residency program now bills itself as a "surgical scientist program."

 

It's the new buzzword en vogue. Medicine is full of buzzwords, and they're often of dubious value.

 

If I was interested in combining research and surgery, though, U of T probably would be my first choice. But pretty much every surgery program requires research from its residents, much to the chagrin of some who just want to be surgeons.

[Guest medicator007]

So true.. medicine (and thus medical teaching) is often dominated by the hottest buzzword of the time.

 

Surgical Scientist is one example, so is the "Biopsychosocial" approach to care.. i see that word used ALL the time in notes/handouts/course descriptions at McGill. I wonder if this buzzword is prevalent elsewhere?

[Guest aneliz]

Psych is quite attached to biopsychosocial stuff...haven't heard it from too many others though!

[Guest UWOMED2005]

I have heard it used in disciplines other than psychiatry.

 

It's often used to show that today's physician is no longer just focussed on biological disease, but rather is in tune to the fact the person's psychology and socioeconomc status are intimately tied to their health status, at least as much as their biochemical lab values. This is rooted in the late 20th century perception (see "House of God," "Patch Adams," "The Doctor") that medicine was focussing so much the biological disease that they were missing the patient as a whole.

 

Thing is, running around blurting "biopsychosocial model"! "biopsychosocial model"! is meaningless unless you understand the reason why this concept is considered important, and more importantly you keep in mind the psychosocial aspects of your patients. . . rather than just repeating a word.

[Guest dakar]

The biopsychosocial model was famously promoted by, of all people, a cardiologist from New York state (Engel) in the late 60's/70's. Of course, the concept has been around for much longer, but he brought it to the forefront of our current medical model.

 

He realized that his fellows and residents were missing the boat by identifying people as "MI's", "heart failures", etc. As much of a buzzword as it's become, however, I think Engel would be disappointed to see the actual implementation (or lack of) the "biopsychosocial" approach in clinical medicine, regardless of how much it's bandied about as a PR term.

 

When was the last time you read an internal medicine admission note and had any idea WHO the person was? (eg. ID: 77 yo male, lives in Toronto).

[Guest therealcrackers]

The education approach is new for the surgical scientist program, but I'm not surprised. The home department for most of the trainees is now run by a surgeon, and his jumped on the bandwagon with both feet a few years back when a program for PhD students to get education training got started. Buzzword or not, it's a really good idea.

 

Thinking back to second year meds, I've lost track of how many profs would have benefitted from a little teaching training... or at least a clue in how to structure exams or write questions... :|

[Guest UWOMED2005]

How true.

 

It definitely seems the further you go on, the more the teachers know about the subject they're teaching, but the less they know about HOW to teach.

[Guest studentz]

the "biopsychosocial" stuff is derived from the WHO definition of health which has remained the same since 1948 or so.