Each year, new graduates enter operating rooms without the confidence or foundational skills needed to manage real-world complexity. This problem didn’t develop overnight. It reflects accumulating issues in surgical education and ethics, along with systemic priorities that limit opportunities for complex case exposure.
Some educators warn that upstream changes in medical school training may further erode orthopaedic preparedness. Dr. Brian Curtin, a hip and knee specialist at OrthoCarolina Hip and Knee Center, has voiced concern about several educational shifts that could contribute to this trend.
If these shifts continue, the field may see fewer applicants with strong musculoskeletal training and fewer students pursuing orthopaedic surgery at all, compounding existing concerns about fellowship readiness.
High volume doesn’t always mean high exposure
Residency programs are producing competent generalists, but too many residents complete their training having done few procedures independently and with little comfort in unusual or complex cases. More than one in four orthopaedic surgery chief residents reported never having performed a primary total hip arthroplasty independently, despite meeting ACGME case minimums.
Case numbers don’t tell the whole story. Distribution matters. Case logs often focus on common fracture patterns, while rare injuries are encountered less frequently.
In arthroplasty, national surveys of program directors report that residents frequently assist rather than serve as primary surgeon for revision procedures as well as cases involving periprosthetic joint infection.
Resident operative autonomy is largely influenced by faculty decisions about assigning responsibility.
Fellowship isn’t a fix for poor training foundations
Fellowships are increasingly seen as a safety net, but relying on fellowships in this way raises ethical concerns. Adult reconstruction fellowship case logs show fellows perform roughly 1.7 to 2.0 times the number of total joint arthroplasty cases in a single fellowship year compared to residents across their entire residency, providing greater exposure to complex and revision procedures.
The consequences of this shift reach beyond the fellows themselves. Fellowship directors and surgical teams often need to adjust their teaching approach, providing more basic instruction than anticipated when new fellows arrive underprepared. These shifts can disrupt the intended educational trajectory and reduce the time available for higher-level learning.
Patients may also feel the effects of this dynamic. When fellows begin their training without a solid foundation, surgeries may take longer, and clinical decision-making can become more hesitant or inconsistent. Even when proper supervision is in place, the earlier educational gaps can influence how care is delivered. The result is a patient experience that may be affected not only by the attending surgeon’s expertise but also by how well the training environment has prepared its learners to contribute effectively in real time.
Programs must stop outsourcing real-world preparation
Academic programs are not simply preparing trainees for board exams or fellowship placement. They are certifying readiness for independent patient care. Surgeons covering call in rural hospitals may be the only orthopaedist available for urgent situations such as a hip dislocation or compartment syndrome.
Training environments have become more structured and, in some cases, insulated from unsupervised decision-making opportunities. Simulation labs, along with cadaveric training, have documented educational benefits but cannot replace supervised operative autonomy with real patients.
As noted in an earlier Orthopaedics 411 article, Simulation Nation: Is This the Future of Ortho Training?, modern VR platforms now offer procedural rehearsal supported by AI and complication scenarios for rare cases.
However, simulation still cannot replicate the realities of live tissue surgery and unpredictable team-based factors. Simulation should be considered a supplement. It is valuable for refining skills and targeted remediation but cannot replace operating room experience with real patients.
Opportunities for advanced trainees to take on greater autonomy before independent practice can differ widely between training environments. In some settings, the final phase of residency offers substantial hands-on responsibility, while in others, the experience remains more observational. These variations mean that the readiness of graduates can depend as much on local training culture as on national standards.
What real accountability looks like
Residency programs should define clear expectations for what graduates can perform without supervision. This includes tracking procedure volume alongside the ability to manage complications independently.
Fellowship programs should provide structured feedback on the preparedness of incoming fellows. Where repeated patterns of deficiency are identified across multiple institutions, residency oversight bodies can incorporate those findings into program evaluations.
Accreditation organizations and boards can reinforce readiness standards through case-based assessments and post-residency evaluations that integrate feedback from multiple sources such as fellowship faculty or employers.
Programs must take responsibility for ensuring their graduates are ready for independent surgical practice in both routine and high-pressure settings until consistent national benchmarks are established.
Sources
Association of Faculty Entrustment With Resident Autonomy in the Operating Room
Faculty Entrustment and Resident Entrustability
Medically Necessary Orthopaedic Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Simulation Nation: Is This the Future of Ortho Training?
Surgical Benchmarks for ACGME-accredited Adult Reconstructive Orthopaedic Fellowship Training
The medical school change that could spell trouble for orthopedics
📥 Want our exclusive guide to preparing for complex cases in orthopaedic surgery?
Answer this one-question poll to download your free PDF: “A Brief Guide to Preparing for Complex Cases in Orthopaedic Surgery.”
