"The minimum case numbers set by the RRC are just that—the bare minimum. If a residency just barely meets its numbers, then there are severe problems with case volume. I would never suggest that you will be inadequately trained by any RRC approved program... "
EAMC has a brand new 5 yr accreditation. Not sure who said they were barely meeting the numbers. Last years chiefs hit all numbers and exceeded them by a substantial number from what I was told. Perhaps I should clarify that this years chiefs will be exceeding the numbers...not just barely meeting them. This is per them and several attendings. I take their word to be truth.
"Its just that some military programs suffer terribly by comparison to their civilian counterparts. The smaller military programs are non-academic community hospital programs with none of the benefits of a typical community hospital program (i.e. high volume, good ancillary support, less bureaucracy, nice perks). :
I would argue they arent at the level of John Hopkins or Pitt but they do see their share of referrals and don't suffer terribly by similar sized civilian programs. 2 whipples in the week before Christmas doesn't look too shabby in my eyes. Its apples to oranges to compare a big name program civ with a smaller program civ or military. I cant argue with the bureaucracy issue, but then again, that is the military.
"So you have residency programs with no national name recognition, no nationally prominent faculty, minimal research, low case volume, high number of away rotations, no level I trauma, minimal tertiary-referral type cases (Whipples, Liver resections, etc), high hassle factor, and weak ancillary support. If these programs were a part of the civilian match, they would be considered bottom of the barrel, and no US grad would rank them. "
"Residency without a national name/prominent faculty is true..then again, I would argue that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Having been in the world of research, the prominent faculty tend to be doing less in the OR/hospital and more in the speaker circuit and research world. There is nothing wrong with that...but you train to be a surgeon..not a paper producer. Anyone can publish, its a matter of whether that is your priority. Its all in what level of importance you put "a big name" as well.
The perception I received from EAMC isn't entirely the same as yours it seems. Pass rate last yr was 100% for both written and oral boards. All residents are actively involved in research with a $300,000 grant having just been given to one of them, another has a pending publication in the journal of trauma (even tho its not a level I), 4 presenting research at a vascular conference in DC, and 4 accepted to present at one of the larger surgical conferences in the south. There are only 3 residents accepted each year so those are pretty good odds if you ask me. The relatively new PD (3 yrs or so) seems to really push research activities and is having them produce from what I see/hear.
As for off site training, they train in Atlanta at Grady (where Dr. Feliciano and his wife are) which is one of the best level 1 sites in the south, and definitely on the higher end in the country. A 2 hour distance for a top training site I would take any day after a local level 1 that is much inferior. I had actually heard that the operative experience early on is better at Hood and Eisenhower from those who have rotated through all. Of course that is just second hand impression.
