The culture of research is based on quality and excellence
P. Choong
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.12140
IF: 1.7
2013-05-01
ANZ Journal of Surgery
Abstract:Research is part of the cycle of innovation that has made surgery one of the most important contributors to translational research. Surgeons at the coalface are in the ideal position to assess the efficacy of their care and techniques, and to know the right questions to ask in seeking solutions to problems. By combining with researchers, the analysis of surgical challenges becomes the food for research and innovation that drives improvements and advances in patient care that has seen the development of surgically led paradigm changes such as the introduction of coronary bypass surgery, joint replacement surgery and total parenteral nutrition to name a few. The culture of research varies widely, with research being a mandatory requirement for training and practice in some communities, while almost non-existent in others. For example, the requirement for research during surgical training in North America is extremely high, and the long-term implications of this are that over 90% of those who undertake research during training continue this after training. On the other hand, only 3% of those who didn’t do research during training ever do any afterwards. This would explain the dominance of the United States in surgical research and breakthroughs. In Australia, the culture of research in training is only just starting to gather momentum despite policies to support this existing for over 2 decades. On average, less than 3% of an Australian surgeon’s weekly work hours are dedicated to research as compared to counterparts in North America where this may be 10 times higher or more. The drivers of research are many, but for Australian surgeons, the most powerful driver is self-motivation. Resources are few, and many academic departments are not geared to raise the entire field of surgery within their hospitals. Departments are often focused on the major interests of the incumbent Chair. The task of funding surgeondriven research in Australia is in many cases overwhelming and lonely. The lack of opportunity and proper education in research principles and methodology reduces the pool of surgeons who are truly competitive in the granting process. This is reflected in the National Health and Medical Research Council grants where less than 5% of successful grants are surgically led. The article by Li in this edition of the journal highlights a different and novel commitment to research, where the imperative for research comes from above. Not only are surgeons expected to undertake research but also earnings are directly linked with productivity where reductions in salary are made if research targets are not made. As expected, surgeons in this environment are highly productive as reflected in their yearly publication rates. The effectiveness of varying methodologies to engender research is probably site specific and reflects the existing ethos. From a global perspective, the best research come out of institutions or departments where the culture within that institution or department is one of excellence and the pursuit of research is encouraged and regarded as a necessary and important partner to the delivery of quality healthcare. While not all institutions can do everything, what they can offer is good mentorship, top-down commitment to supporting research, engagement of leaders who can inspire research and environments that promote collaboration. As custodians of junior staff careers, it is incumbent on all surgical leaders to help residents, trainees and junior consultants to increase their capabilities because by doing so, they increase the capabilities of the institution and the intellectual power to solve problems. Research is a precious part of service delivery as it maintains the standards, refines appropriateness of care and is the platform for advancing the field.