Andrew Walters the president of the Society of Gynaecologic Surgeons states “Every woman deserves a high-volume gynecologic surgeon”. David Urbach in The New England Journal of Medicine discussed the “Pledge” to eliminate low volume surgery. Is any of this feasible or desirable?
Training numbers & case numbers - this balance has been becoming more and more unbalanced over the past decade. Trainee numbers have increased significantly with at the same time a decrease in surgical exposure thanks to advances in technology and increasing subspecialisation. Does the level of training make a difference or is it down to the decade of experience?
Case volume is a key determinate of surgical outcomes. International and Australian data confirm this but how do we translate this into practice and where do we move forwards from here. What are the current outcome measures and how many cases do we need to do to remain proficient.
Given this how do we effectively train the next generation?