What would you do (WWYD)? Thinking outside the virtual lecture box during COVID-19 and beyond.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted many aspects of personal and professional life for surgeons, with resulting suspension of many in-person educational opportunities in favor of virtual education programs. Adapting to these new challenges, we developed, implemented, and evaluated a novel approach to Department of Surgery Grand Rounds to meet the educational needs of residents.

METHODS: At the outset of COVID-19-related restrictions, educational leadership performed a needs assessment of resident education, leading to a quick pivot to video-based programming. We developed "What Would You Do?" (WWYD), a virtual case-based educational session. Junior residents worked with senior residents, fellows, and faculty to develop disease-specific cases and questions, which were then presented to a panel of invited national subject experts. Feedback was collected from attendees after each grand rounds session via electronic survey, and the panel logistics and "flipped classroom" style of questioning iteratively adapted based on survey responses, verbal feedback, and educational principles. A department-wide survey was conducted at the end of the first year of virtual sessions to assess faculty and trainee perceptions of virtual vs. in-person didactics.

RESULTS: While COVID-19 educational materials were widely available, needs assessment found that surgical educational programming for trainees was dramatically reduced. Over a period of 24 months, we hosted twelve WWYD sessions with 20 internal faculty and 22 national virtual guest panelists. WWYD covered core surgical topics, such as hernia, colorectal, trauma, endocrine, vascular, foregut, and transplant. Weekly attendance ranged from 40 to 100, including faculty, trainees, and students. Attendees at WWYD grand rounds reported more strong agreement that speakers communicated effectively (93.7% vs. 79.8%, p < 0.0001), and that topics were engaging (92.4% vs. 78.5%, p  < 0.0001) and relevant (91.5% vs. 79.7%, p  < 0.0001), when compared to didactic virtual grand rounds. Department-wide survey noted differences in faculty vs. trainee priorities for didactic sessions, with faculty both finding virtual didactics more convenient (92.1% vs. 71.4% strong agreement, p  = 0.004) and more highly valuing convenience (89.7% vs. 69.1% highly value, p  = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS: During an isolating time, the WWYD format leveraged affordances of a virtual platform to bring diverse content experts together for disease-specific discussions, aligning with problem-based, active learning pedagogical approaches which have proven more effective than lectures. Attendees found the format more engaging than virtual didactic lectures, but department-wide survey revealed a dichotomy of didactic priorities between faculty and trainees, with faculty more strongly favoring attendance convenience. WWYD is well-positioned to deliver a didactic educational experience with both engagement and convenience.