Vol. 71 No. 3 (2019)
Original Articles

Analysis of the training program of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery of the University of Chile: survey of graduates 2011-2017

Sergio Leonardo Sepúlveda Pereira
Hospital Clinico Universidad de Chile
Bio
Diego Andres Quispe Valdes
Hospital Clinico Universidad de Chile
Bio
Luis Felipe Selman Briceño
Hospital Clinico Universidad de Chile
Bio
Enrique . Larrain Compagnon
Hospital Clinico Universidad de Chile
Stefan Vladimir Danilla Enei
Hospital Clinico Universidad de Chile
Bio
Cristian Antonio Erazo Cortes
Hospital Clinico Universidad de Chile
Bio
Claudia Rocio Albornoz Garrido
Hospital Clinico Universidad de Chile
Bio
Patricio Ricardo Andrades Cvitanic
Hospital Clinico Universidad de Chile
Bio

Published 2019-05-02

How to Cite

1.
Sepúlveda Pereira SL, Quispe Valdes DA, Selman Briceño LF, Larrain Compagnon E ., Danilla Enei SV, Erazo Cortes CA, et al. Analysis of the training program of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery of the University of Chile: survey of graduates 2011-2017. Rev Cir. [Internet]. 2019 May 2 [cited 2026 Aug. 22];71(3). Available from: https://revistacirugia.cl/index.php/revistacirugia/article/view/301

Abstract

Background: The adequate plastic surgeons training demand a constant review and assessment of the training programs of residents. It has been 8 years since the first survey made to Plastic Surgery graduates of the University of Chile about the program training.

Aim: Collect the opinion of Plastic Surgery graduates of the University of Chile between the years 2011-2017, in order to compare the results with previous generations. Materials and Method: A survey of 28 questions was conducted which evaluated general aspects of the residence, specific rotations of the resident, practical activities, theoretical activities and economic and research aspects.

Results: There has been 21 graduates between 2011-2017, a survey response was obtained in 16 of them, 100% of the respondents approved the training program, 63% of respondents consider the duration of the program is insufficient. The best-evaluated rotation of the program was HCUCH according to 56% of graduates. The areas of best training perceived were body contour surgery and breast aesthetic surgery, respectively.

Conclusion: Plastic surgery training program approval is still high in graduates; nevertheless the opinion about the needing for a more extensive program is kept. The analysis collected from this survey is an excellent tool to identify aspects of the training program can be improved.