Do Graduating Oral-Maxillofacial Surgery Residents Feel Confident in Practicing the Full Scope of the Specialty?

PURPOSE: Laskin (2008) suggested that the core of oral and maxillofacial surgery could be divided into 3 levels: 1) areas of expertise, such as oral pathology, oral medicine, dentoalveolar surgery, preprosthetic surgery, and maxillofacial traumatology; 2) areas of competence, including orthognathic surgery, temporomandibular joint surgery, and local reconstructive surgery; and 3) areas of familiarity that include cleft lip and palate surgery, craniofacial surgery, regional reconstructive surgery, oncologic surgery, and cosmetic surgery. The purpose of this study is to assess residents' confidence in practicing the full scope of oral-maxillofacial surgery and their perception of gaps existing in their training. The investigators hypothesized that graduating residents' confidence in practicing the full scope of oral-maxillofacial surgery falls within the suggested levels by Laskin.

METHODS: The investigators implemented a cross-sectional study. A questionnaire was designed, and a link to a Partners REDCap (Nashville, TN) survey was electronically mailed to 252 chief residents in the final month (July 2018) of their program. The questionnaire included resident demographic characteristics, program demographic characteristics, and residents' perceived preparedness, level of proficiency, comfort, and experience for each area.

RESULTS: The sample was composed of 78 graduating residents, with a response rate of 31%. Analyses included univariate statistics and a Wilcoxon signed rank test. Significance was set at P < .05. There was no significant difference between orthognathic surgery and each area in the expertise category, and in some cases, a significantly higher perception of ability in orthognathic surgery (P < .05). There was a significantly lower perception of training in oral medicine than each area in the expertise category (P < .05), suggesting a deficit in oral medicine training.

CONCLUSIONS: Residents perceived that their training in orthognathic surgery was at the level of expertise, higher than expected. They also perceived a training deficit in oral medicine. Training proficiency in dentoalveolar surgery was found to be at a level higher than any other area.