Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões (Dec 2012)
Avaliação da preceptoria na residência médica em cirurgia geral, no centro cirúrgico, comparação entre um hospital universitário e um hospital não universitário Assessment of preceptorship in general surgery residency in the operating room, comparison between a teaching hospital and a non teaching hospital
Abstract
OBJETIVO: Avaliar e comparar a preceptoria no programa de residência médica em Cirurgia Geral, no centro cirúrgico, em um hospital universitário e em um hospital não universitário, a partir da ótica dos residentes que ingressaram em 2010 e 2011. MÉTODOS: Questionário aplicado aos residentes, modificado de Sarker SK, Vincent C, e Darzi AW e usando-se a escala de Likert para qualificar o ítem pesquisado sobre as atitudes dos preceptores. A comparação da distribuição das respostas entre os dois hospitais foi analisada pelo teste de c² para tendências. RESULTADOS: No hospital universitário foram avaliados 12 preceptores por sete residentes. No hospital não universitário foram 11 preceptores avaliados por 13 residentes. O hospital não universitário apresentou a tendência de resposta discordante e indiferente (DC, D e I) maior que o hospital universitário. Só o resultado de uma pergunta apresentou significância estatística. Não houve diferença significativa na comparação das respostas nas demais perguntas entre os dois hospitais. CONCLUSÃO: Os hospitais apresentaram preceptoria semelhante.BACKGROUND: Medical residency is well known as the best training method after graduation. It is a moment when, in addition to receiving technical guidance, residents should also develop attitudes, ethics, and professionalism. In order for that to occur, preceptors should be prepared for their task. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the preceptorship in the Medical Residency in General Surgery program, in the operating room of a Teaching Hospital (TH) and a Non-teaching Hospital (NTH), from the viewpoint of the residents who entered in 2010 and 2011. METHODS: A questionnaire was applied to the residents, adapted from Sarker, Vincent and Darzi, and the Likert scale was used to qualify the survey items on the preceptors' attitudes. RESULTS: At the TH, 12 preceptors were evaluated by 7 residents. One of the residents did not answer the questionnaire. At the NTH, 11 preceptors were evaluated by 13 residents. The comparison of the distribution of responses between hospitals was analyzed using the chi-squared test for trend. Significance level was set at 5%. The statistical analysis was processed by the statistical software SAS® System version 6.11 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, North Carolina). The NTH showed a greater trend for discordant and indifferent responses than the TH. Only one question resulted in statistical significance between the hospitals. No significant difference was found between hospitals in the comparison of the responses to the remaining CONCLUSION: Only question 4 ("Keeps focused on the operation") showed a significant difference (p=0.010) in the distribution of responses. The two hospitals exhibited similar preceptorship quality.
