Skip to main content
Log in

What makes a “great resident”: the resident perspective

  • Resident Education (P Achan, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Orthopedic surgery residency training is a difficult endeavor, and the selection of residents that will perform well in a rigorous training program is challenging for residency program directors. Even defining a “great” resident is a difficult endeavor. However, there are certain qualities that anecdotally are associated with high-performing residents, which include being trustworthy, hard-working and efficient, self-directed learners, detail-oriented, and personable. These qualities are difficult to teach and are likely learned by an individual during their early years of education and groomed during college and medical school. Individuals possessing these characteristics are more likely to bring a high-level of professionalism to their work as residents and to perform well on objective measures of success in residency such as high OITE scores, good faculty evaluations, and peer-reviewed publications. We discuss the available, but limited, literature on what makes a “great” resident and share the resident perspective on this topic.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Kennedy TJ, Regehr G, Baker GR, et al. Preserving professional credibility: grounded theory study of medical trainees’ requests for clinical support. BMJ. 2009;338:b128. doi:10.1136/bmj.b128.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sterkenburg A, Barach P, Kalkman C, et al. When do supervising physicians decide to entrust residents with unsupervised tasks? Acad Med. 2010;85:1408–17. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181eab0ec.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Breen KJ, Hogan AM, Mealy K. The detrimental impact of the implementation of the European working time directive (EWTD) on surgical senior house officer (SHO) operative experience. Ir J Med Sci. 2013;182:383–7. doi:10.1007/s11845-012-0894-6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Canter R. Impact of reduced working time on surgical training in the United Kingdom and Ireland. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 2011;9 Suppl 1:S6–7. doi:10.1016/j.surge.2010.11.020.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Lim E, Tsui S. Impact of the European Working Time Directive on exposure to operative cardiac surgical training. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006;30:574–7. doi:10.1016/j.ejcts.2006.04.024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Al-Hadithy N, Gikas PD, Al-Nammari SS. Smartphones in orthopaedics. Int Orthop. 2012;36:1543–7. doi:10.1007/s00264-012-1527-4.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rowley BD, Baldwin DC Jr, Bay RC, et al. Can professional values be taught? A look at residency training. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 2000;378:110–4. doi:10.1097/00003086-200009000-00018.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Reed DA, West CP, Mueller PS, et al. Behaviors of highly professional resident physicians. JAMA. 2008;300:1326–33. doi:10.1001/jama.300.11.1326.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ponce BA, Determann JR, Boohaker HA, et al. Social networking profiles and professionalism issues in residency applicants: an original study-cohort study. J Surg Educ. 2013;70:502–7. doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2013.02.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Evarts CM. Resident selection: a key to the future of orthopaedics. Clin Orthop Related Res. 2006;449:39–43. doi:10.1097/01.blo.0000224032.23850.55.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Spitzer AB, Gage MJ, Looze CA, et al. Factors associated with successful performance in an orthopaedic surgery residency. J Bone Joint Surg. 2009;91:2750–5. doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.01243. This paper examined factors from both medical school and during residency that were associated with good performance in an orthopedic surgery training program.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hurwitz SR. 2012 Rules and Procedures for Residency Education Part I and Part II Examinations. Chapel Hill: American Board of Orthopedic Surgery, Inc.; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Macknin JB, Brown A, Marcus RE. Does research participation make a difference in residency training? Clin Orthop Related Res. 2013. doi:10.1007/s11999-013-3233-y.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Atesok KI, Hurwitz SR, Egol KA, et al. Perspective: integrating research into surgical residency education: lessons learned from orthopaedic surgery. Acad Med. 2012;87:592–7. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e31824d2b57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ginsburg S, McIlroy J, Oulanova O, et al. Toward authentic clinical evaluation: pitfalls in the pursuit of competency. Acad Med. 2010;85:780–6. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181d73fb6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gofton W, Regehr G. What we don’t know we are teaching: unveiling the hidden curriculum. Clin Orthop Related Res. 2006;449:20–7. doi:10.1097/01.blo.0000224024.96034.b2.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Venu M. Nemani, Caroline Park, and Danyal H. Nawabi declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Venu M. Nemani.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nemani, V.M., Park, C. & Nawabi, D.H. What makes a “great resident”: the resident perspective. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 7, 164–167 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-014-9210-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-014-9210-6

Keywords

Navigation