Publication:

Plastic Surgery Training Worldwide: Part 1. The United States and Europe

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2016

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Wolters Kluwer Health
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Kamali, Parisa, Maaike W. van Paridon, Ahmed M. S. Ibrahim, Marek A. Paul, Henri A. Winters, Veronique Martinot-Duquennoy, Ernst Magnus Noah, Norbert Pallua, and Samuel J. Lin. 2016. “Plastic Surgery Training Worldwide: Part 1. The United States and Europe.” Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open 4 (3): e641. doi:10.1097/GOX.0000000000000627. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000627.

Abstract

Background: Major differences exist in residency training, and the structure and quality of residency programs differ between different countries and teaching centers. It is of vital importance that a better understanding of the similarities and differences in plastic surgery training be ascertained as a means of initiating constructive discussion and commentary among training programs worldwide. In this study, the authors provide an overview of plastic surgery training in the United States and Europe. Methods: A survey was sent to select surgeons in 10 European countries that were deemed to be regular contributors to the plastic surgery literature. The questions focused on pathway to plastic surgery residency, length of training, required pretraining experience, training scheme, research opportunities, and examinations during and after plastic surgery residency. Results: Plastic surgery residency training programs in the United States differ from the various (selected) countries in Europe and are described in detail. Conclusions: Plastic surgery education is vastly different between the United States and Europe, and even within Europe, training programs remain heterogeneous. Standardization of curricula across the different countries would improve the interaction of different centers and facilitate the exchange of vital information for quality control and future improvements. The unique characteristics of the various training programs potentially provide a basis from which to learn and to gain from one another.

Description

Research Data

Keywords

Terms of Use

This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Related Stories