Introduction
Surgical training
Surgical training in gynaecology has seen dramatic changes in both the UK and the USA over the past 20ā30 years. When the current editors were in training, there were no restrictions on the number of hours that they could be asked to work. It was common to be resident on call every third night in addition to daytime work, which often resulted in a working week in excess of 110 hours. In the UK, the European Working Time Directive was extended to junior doctors in 2004 thereby reducing the working week to an average of 48 hours. In the United States, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education in 2003 required duty hours to be limited to 80 hours per week.
Although the reduction in working hours is important for oneās workālife balance as well as patient safety, it inevitably has had a major impact on surgical training. The concept of the surgical team or firm to which a trainee was attached has all but disappeared. The introduction of shift systems has made it difficult, and in some cases impossible, for trainees to attend the surgical and clinical sessions of their team. This has resulted in some trainees failing to comprehend the continuity of care of a surgical patient, running the risk of producing technicians rather then doctors.
At the same time, there has been a marked reduction in the number of hysterectomies performed as a result of more conservative management options for dysfunctional uterine bleeding. In the nineāyear period from 1995 to 2004, there was a 46% reduction in the number of hysterectomy operations performed in NHS hospitals in England and between 2008 and 2012 there was a further 7% fall in hysterectomies in the UK.
With the increasing use of laparoscopic surgery in elective gynaecology, including for hysterectomy, the āopenā approach to gynaecological surgery, traditionally the surgical ābread and butterā for trainees, is also on the decline. Equally, a large number of ectopic pregnancies are now managed conservatively meaning that trainees are lacking exposure to emergency laparoscopic surgery for tubal pregnancies.
It is vital that standard safe techniques continue to be taught to all trainees. Thus, although many procedures have been translated into minimal access operations the principles and practice of the open version must be learned alongside the minimal access approach. This is especially relevant wherever a minimal access procedure has to be translated into an open procedure because of difficulties and complications experienced during the operation. It is a concern of the editors that the āunusualā is not being experienced on a satisfactory scale by trainees. Nothing can replace time spent in the operating room for building up skills and confidence in dealing with the unusual and unexpected. A recent comment by a president of a Royal College compared the time limited training of a surgeon to the limitless time application of an Olympic athlete. Very few gold medals would be won if the Working Time Directive was followed!
Gynaecology training
Current training in the UK is a competencyābased process and it is envisaged that the majority of trainees will take seven years to complete the programme. In the last two years of training, the trainees are required to undertake a minimum of two of twenty available advanced training skills modules or they can apply for subspecialty training in gynaecological oncology, maternal and fetal medicine, reproductive medicine or urogynaecology. It is disappointing that as part of the current training programme the trainee must be deemed competent in opening and closing a transverse incision at caesarean section before commencing his or her second year but need only be assessed as competent for opening and closing a vertical abdominal incision if undertaking the advanced module for benign surgery in years six and seven.
Basic skills and training opportunities
Trainees wishing to develop as gynaecological surgeons should attend appropriate courses, including cadaver and live animal workshops. However, these are no substitutes for learning the basic surgical skills and picking up good habits, early in training; bad habits are difficult to lose at a later stage. As assistants, they should question any variations in technique among the surgeons. As surgeons, they should review every operation they perform to assess how they could have done better.
In relation to laparoscopic surgery, there is no excuse for trainees not practising with laparoscopic simulators, which are often readily available and easy to construct. It is readily apparent to trainers which trainees have spent adequate time on simulators.
Sadly, a consequence of the new training is an inevitable lack of knowledge and experience of the āunusualā, with the all too frequent result of difficulties for both the patient and the surgeon. These difficulties are often manifest in an almost complete failure to appreciate the wide range of possibilities for management. Previous editors of this text have advocated that any surgery should be tailored to the specific needs of the patient and her condition. Unfortunately, modern patients are in real danger of being treated by surgeons with a limited experience and a narrow range of skills which may be applied in a āone size fits allā pattern. In this text, we have attempted to provide a wide range of options for management, which we would encourage all trainees to practise assiduously to give their patients the very best possible chance of a successful outcome.
Despite the recent changes in gynaecological training, the essence of surgery remains essentially unchanged. The editors have, as with previous editions, felt it appropriate to retain the prologue written for the 9th and 10th editions by JM Monaghan based on that of the 1st edition of this series, A Textābook of Gynaecological Surgery, published in 1911 by Comyns Berkeley and Victor Bonney. It remains just as relevant today as it was a century ago.