This retrospective study was performed to publish the current trends of major surgical procedures from the General Cosmetic Surgery fellowship programs offered by the American Academy of Cosmetic Surgery from July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2018. Data were obtained from the American Academy of Cosmetic Surgery. Fellowship data and the surgical procedures reported by fellow surgeons were analyzed from July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2018. Averages, trends, correlation coefficient, and coefficient of determination were calculated using Microsoft Excel. From July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2018, the number of fellowship programs increased by 26.3%, and the fellows completed 633.3 procedures on average during their 1 year training. The most common procedures performed averaged per fellow were liposuction (215.1), breast augmentation (79.7), abdominoplasty (44.8), breast reduction/lift (38.9), and eyelid surgery (33.7). Strongest increasing trends in surgical procedures included circumferential abdominoplasty and breast re-augmentation. Strongest decreasing trends included body implants and vein procedures. The study demonstrated increasing, decreasing, and neutral trends over the academic years from July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2018. Further studies can analyze causative or correlative factors.
American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. Cosmetic surgery national data bank statistics 2017. Aesthet Surg J. 2017;37(suppl 2):1-29. doi:10.1093/asj/sjx076.
2.
MilothridisPPavlidisLHaidichABPanagopoulouE.A systematic review of the factors predicting the interest in cosmetic plastic surgery. Indian J Plast Surg. 2016;49(3):397-402. doi:10.4103/0970-0358.197224.
3.
SlevecJTiggemannM.Attitudes toward cosmetic surgery in middle-aged women: body image, aging anxiety, and the media. Psychol Women Quart. 2010;34(1):65-74. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2009.01542.x.
4.
SwamiV.Body appreciation, media influence, and weight status predict consideration of cosmetic surgery among female undergraduates. Body Image. 2009;6(4):315-317. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2009.07.001.
HandlerETavassoliJDhaliwalHMurrayMHaiavyJ.A review of general cosmetic surgery training in fellowship programs offered by the American academy of cosmetic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(4):580-586. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2014.11.019.
AkogluH.User’s guide to correlation coefficients. Turk J Emerg Med. 2018;18(3):91-93. doi:10.1016/j.tjem.2018.08.001.
12.
NaikNAbbottEAhoJ, et al. The ACGME case log system may not accurately represent operative experience among general surgery interns. J Surg Educ. 2017;74(6):e106-e110. doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2017.09.032.
13.
McPheetersMTalcottRHubbardMHainesSHuntMA.Assessing the accuracy of neurological surgery resident case logs at a single institution. Surg Neurol Int. 2017;8:206. doi:10.4103/sni.sni_83_17.
14.
BallaFGarweTMotghareP, et al. Evaluating coding accuracy in general surgery residents’ Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education procedural case logs. J Surg Educ. 2016;73(6):e59-e63. doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.07.017.
15.
DermodySMGaoWMcGinnJDMalekzadehS.Case-logging practices in otolaryngology residency training: national survey of residents and program directors. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;156(6):1072-1077. doi:10.1177/0194599817702622.
16.
CairoSCraigWGutheilC, et al. Quantitative analysis of surgical residency reform: using case-logs to evaluate resident experience. J Surg Educ. 2019;76(1):25-35. doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2018.05.013.
17.
MaruthappuMDuclosALipsitzSROrgillDCartyMJ.Surgical learning curves and operative efficiency: a cross-specialty observational study. BMJ Open. 2015;5(3):e006679. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006679.
18.
BurtBMElBardissiAWHuckmanRS, et al. Influence of experience and the surgical learning curve on long-term patient outcomes in cardiac surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;150(5): 1061-1068.e3. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.07.068.
YeolekarAQadriH.The learning curve in surgical practice and its applicability to rhinoplasty. Indian J Otolaryngol. 2017;70(1):38-42. doi:10.1007/s12070-017-1199-x.
23.
KhanNAbboudiHKhanMSDasguptaPAhmedK.Measuring the surgical ‘learning curve’: methods, variables and competency. BJU Int. 2013;113(3):504-508. doi:10.1111/bju.12197.
24.
WulfGSheaCLewthwaiteR.Motor skill learning and performance: a review of influential factors. Med Educ. 2010;44(1):75-84. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03421.x.
25.
Doyle HowleyLMartindaleJ. The efficacy of standardized patient feedback in clinical teaching: a mixed methods analysis. Med Educ Online. 2004;9(1):4356. doi:10.3402/meo.v9i.4356.
26.
WulfGSheaCMatschinerS.Frequent feedback enhances complex motor skill learning. J Motor Behav. 1998;30(2):180-192. doi:10.1080/00222899809601335.
27.
PorteMXeroulisGReznickRDubrowskiA.Verbal feedback from an expert is more effective than self-accessed feedback about motion efficiency in learning new surgical skills. Am J Surg. 2007;193(1):105-110. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2006.03.016.
28.
SalernoSJacksonJO’MalleyPG.Interactive faculty development seminars improve the quality of written feedback in ambulatory teaching. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18(10):831-834. doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20739.x.
29.
VeloskiJBoexJGrasbergerMEvansAWolfsonD.Systematic review of the literature on assessment, feedback and physicians’ clinical performance: BEME Guide No 7. Med Teach. 2006;28(2):117-128. doi:10.1080/01421590600622665.
30.
RamaniSKrackovSK.Twelve tips for giving feedback effectively in the clinical environment. Med Teach. 2012;34(10):787-791. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2012.684916.
31.
AbernethyBPooltonJMastersRPatilNG.Implications of an expertise model for surgical skills training. ANZ J Surg. 2008;78(12):1092-1095. doi:10.1111/j.1445-2197.2008.04756.x.
