Innovatively Bridging Gaps in Aesthetic Surgery Training: Insights and Initiatives
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Worldwide, studies have consistently pointed out deficiencies in aesthetic surgery training due to a lack of structured training programs. In India, residents lack confidence in cosmetic surgery procedures posttraining, primarily due to limited exposure to aesthetic surgery procedures in teaching hospitals.[ 1 ] A comparative survey of aesthetic training systems revealed that the combined theoretical and hands-on approach in System A (Brazil) resulted in higher self-confidence among junior plastic surgeons compared with the solely theoretical approach in System B (Italy).[ 2 ] Notably, Vissers et al[ 3 ] highlighted the contrast in plastic surgery training between the United Kingdom and Belgium, where Belgium's integrated aesthetic surgery training resulted in higher confidence levels; the UK's National Health Service lacked exposure to cosmetic surgery. A study in United States showed over half of residents felt least trained in aesthetic surgery, with 56.4% intending to seek additional training postresidency, especially those with more experience in specific subspecialties. However, there was increased confidence among residents, particularly Postgraduate Year-5 and Postgraduate Year-6, after participating in clinic rotations.[ 4 ] Residents in Europe are mandated to have aesthetic surgery exposure for board certification.[ 5 ] Residents in Canada showed an increasing number of aesthetic procedures performed as training progressed, with confidence levels rising throughout the residency period.[ 6 ] Aligned with Indian Association Of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons Syllabus, the Department of Plastic Surgery at All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Delhi, adopts a multidimensional approach to provide comprehensive training in aesthetic surgery. The curriculum, detailed in [ Table 1 ], covers all aspects of aesthetic surgery. Monthly online classes, totaling 60 hours yearly, are conducted by external senior experts and department faculties. Practical learning is emphasized through quarterly cadaveric workshops (40 hours) and hands-on surgical workshops (80 hours) encompassing various techniques ([ Fig. 1 ]). Ethical considerations, accurate diagnosis, aesthetic assessment, effective management planning, client counselling, postoperative care, and follow-up are integral parts of the curriculum ([ Fig. 2 ]). Table 1 Hour-wise distribution of topics covered under aesthetic curriculum Topics Teaching (hours) Hands-on (hours) Cadaveric (hours) A) Facial plastic surgery 17 23 12 a. Blepharoplasty 1 2 1 b. Brow lift 1 2 1 c. Face and neck lift 5 6 3 d. Perioral surgery 1 2 1 e. Otoplasty 1 2 1 f. Rhinoplasty 5 5 3 g. Profiloplasty 1 2 1 h. Facial Implants 1 2 1 B) Noninvasive and minimal invasive (injectables, fat grafting, thread lift, laser resurfacing and nonablative treatments, etc.) 14 14 7 C) Hair transplantation 4 5 2 D) Breast surgery 8 8 4 a. Augmentation mammaplasty and mastopexy 4 4 2 c. Reduction mammaplasty 2 3 1 d. Nonflap-based breast reconstruction 2 1 1 E) Abdominoplasty 2 5 2 F) Body lift 5 10 5 G) Liposuction/body contouring 6 12 6 a. Liposuction torso (male and female) 2 4 2 c. Liposuction limbs 2 4 2 d. Gluteal reshaping and implantation 2 4 2 H) Genital aesthetic surgery 4 3 2 Total 60 80 40 Additionally, residents and faculty participate in a discussion group where they share challenging and intriguing cases that provide valuable learning opportunities. During these sessions, the residents conduct a systematic assessment of the cases and receive further guidance from expert faculty members. Additionally, the department offers a collaborative dermatosurgery clinic that focuses on formal learning in aesthetic medicine and procedures such as lasers, microneedling, radio frequency, peels, and injectables. Furthermore, the program offers advanced training opportunities through formal rotations in high-volume aesthetic units. We analyzed the effectiveness of this unique training model, observing statistically significant improvements in residents' knowledge and technical skills during regular cadaveric workshops using fresh-frozen cadavers. Our study revealed that nearly 100% of residents found the training relevant and comprehensive, with 95% recognizing its impact on their future goals in aesthetic surgery. Literature highlights the need for further initiatives and discussion like integration, aiming to enhance standards of aesthetic care in the entire region. It emphasizes the need for a more organized systematic, protocol-driven approach to aesthetic surgery in India. Fig. 1 Cadaver model being used to train residents in liposuction. Fig. 2 Hands-on training in liposuction. Publication History Article published online: 30 May 2024 © 2024. Association of Plastic Surgeons of India. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd. A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,011 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,012 | 0,011 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,014 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».