Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorMadanat, Rami
dc.contributor.authorMakinen, Tatu J.
dc.contributor.authorRyan, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorHuri, Gazi
dc.contributor.authorPaschos, Nikolaos
dc.contributor.authorVide, Joao
dc.date.accessioned2019-12-12T06:46:09Z
dc.date.available2019-12-12T06:46:09Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.issn0341-2695
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3427-0
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11655/16978
dc.description.abstractPurpose The aim of this study was to compare differences in current orthopaedic and trauma training programs across Europe. Methods A questionnaire was sent to the FORTE (Federation of Orthopaedic Trainees in Europe) representatives of 25 different European countries, of which 18 responded. The questionnaire included demographic information and information concerning the structure of the training programs, including duration, selection, and mandatory training requirements. Results The number of trainees per specialist varied between countries from a ratio of 1:2 to 1:7. Residency was generally five to six years in all the countries. In more than half of the countries selection was interview-based. Nearly all countries utilized a logbook. About 80% of the participating countries had a final examination. When assessing the components of training it was found that only one country (the United Kingdom) had mandatory minimum requirements for (1) courses, (2) surgical procedures, (3) research and (4) leadership. Nearly 40% of the participating countries had only one or none of these four components as a mandatory training requirement. Conclusions There are many similarities in training programs, but some important differences remain in overall requirements and final qualification. The main limitation of this study was that we were unable to get data from all the European countries. FORTE will continue to serve as a forum for sharing best practices with the ultimate goal of improving and harmonizing the level of orthopaedic training across Europe. Future studies should aim to include further details about training programs as well as to include data from more countries.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.relation.isversionof10.1007/s00264-017-3427-0
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectOrthopedics
dc.titleThe Current State of Orthopaedic Residency in 18 European Countries
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.relation.journalInternational Orthopaedics
dc.contributor.departmentOrtopedi ve Travmatoloji
dc.identifier.volume41
dc.identifier.issue4
dc.identifier.startpage681
dc.identifier.endpage687
dc.description.indexWoS


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster