Resident and faculty perceptions of a surgical residency program merger

Abstract

PurposeTo evaluate resident and faculty perceptions of a residency merger process. MethodsSurvey of faculty and residents of a recently merged general surgical residency. Nineteen separate program characteristics were evaluated via a numerical scoring system, and additional written commentary regarding dominant perceived benefits and detriments of the merger was solicited. Statistical significance was evaluated on numerically scored items by applying the Mann-Whitney U test to median values expressed with interquartile ranges, comparing resident and faculty responses. ResultsScoring system responses from faculty and residents were generally similar. The merger was seen as neutral to positive in its impact on academic issues, but it had more negative effects on issues related to overall program atmosphere and morale. Statistically significant differences between resident and faculty responses were noted in 2 areas: teaching conference timing and overall program effectiveness in preparing for practice. Both of these areas were more favorably impacted by the merger from the residents’ perspective, and more negatively as judged by the faculty (p < 0.05). Written commentary by both groups similarly emphasized areas of academic strengthening as a positive effect of the merger, and relationship and morale issues as being more negatively impacted. ConclusionsAs reflected by resident and faculty perceptions, program mergers may provide opportunities to strengthen and enhance the academic and clinical foundation of residency. This may, however, occur at the expense of morale and relational issues, which may be negatively impacted by program administrative and geographic expansion.