Abstract
Competency levels of AOSpine members (Europe) based on whether or not they had undertaken a full 12 month fellowship in spinal surgery
Self-assessment questionnaire distributed to members (60 questions relating to: previous surgical training, fellowships and their nature, and both theoretical and practical competency amongst basic and advanced spinal conditions)
289 completed responses
Competency levels with(out) fellowship; differences in fellowship training; overall competence in spinal surgery as neurosurgeons versus those trained as orthopaedic surgeons. Competency defined as those able to deal with complications or able to perform without supervision.
28% (n=80) undertook a full 12 month fellowship
Notable differences between groups were identified (fellowship vs no fellowship): spinal deformity (58% vs 26%), cervical trauma (83% vs 59%), cervical stabilisation (78% vs 53%), lumbar and thoracic trauma (85% vs 57%) and anterior surgery (66% vs 41%) and its complications (46% vs 23%).
Interestingly of the whole group only 43% were competent in the actual practice of conservative management of spinal conditions.
There was no significant difference in theoretical knowledge or practical skills between orthopaedics surgeons and neurosurgeons.
Fellowship training is effective, but there are deficiencies in areas. In order to provide a routine and emergency service as a spinal surgeon, competency at relatively common procedures must be reached. Our data demonstrates a lack of uniformity in such competencies, and we believe efforts towards a formal curriculum for spinal training should be embarked upon.
