Diversification of the medical and cardiothoracic surgical workforce represents an ongoing need. A congenital cardiac surgery shadowing programme for undergraduate students was implemented at the University of Florida Congenital Heart Center.

Students shadowing in the Congenital Heart Center from 17 December 2020 through 20 July 2021 were sent a survey through Qualtrics to evaluate the impact of their shadowing experience. The main objectives of the survey were to determine the personal relationship(s) of the students to physicians prior to shadowing, how the presence or absence of physicians in the family of a given student related to the exposure of the student to a medical setting prior to shadowing, and the interest of the students in medicine and cardiothoracic surgery prior to and after the shadowing experience. Survey responses included “Yes/No” questions, scaled responses using a Likert scale, selection lists, and free text responses. When applicable, t-tests were utilised to assess differences between student groups.

Of the 37 students who shadowed during the study period, 26 (70%) responded. Most students were female (58%, n = 15), and the mean age was 20.9 ± 2.4 years. Students spent a mean duration of 95 ± 138 hours shadowing providers as part of the shadowing programme. Likert scale ratings of interest in the professions of medicine, surgery, and cardiothoracic surgery all increased after the shadowing experience (p < 0.01). Students with a family member in medicine had more clinical exposure prior to the shadowing programme (p < 0.01).

A surgical shadowing programme at a Congenital Heart Center may have an important formative impact on the views of undergraduate students regarding potential careers in surgery and medicine. Additionally, students without family members in medicine tend to have less prior exposure to medicine and could likely benefit more from this type of shadowing programme.

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the growing global interest in the role of augmented and virtual reality in surgical training. While this technology grows at a rapid rate, its efficacy remains unclear. To that end, we offer a systematic review of the literature summarizing the role of virtual and augmented reality on spine surgery training.

A systematic review of the literature was conducted on May 13th, 2022. PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, and Embase were reviewed for relevant studies. Studies from both orthopedic and neurosurgical spine programs were considered. There were no restrictions placed on the type of study, virtual/augmented reality modality, nor type of procedure. Qualitative data analysis was performed, and all studies were assigned a Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) score.

The initial review identified 6752 studies, of which 16 were deemed relevant and included in the final review, examining a total of nine unique augmented/virtual reality systems. These studies had a moderate methodological quality with a MERSQI score of 12.1 + 1.8; most studies were conducted at single-center institutions, and unclear response rates. Statistical pooling of the data was limited by the heterogeneity of the study designs.

This review examined the applications of augmented and virtual reality systems for training residents in various spine procedures. As this technology continues to advance, higher-quality, multi-center, and long-term studies are required to further the adaptation of VR/AR technologies in spine surgery training programs.

Recent changes in surgical education have had an impact on our congenital training programmes. The mandate of the 8-hour workweek, a rapidly expanding knowledge base, and a host of other mandates has had an impact on the readiness of the fellows who are entering congenital programmes. To understand these issues completely, we interviewed the top congenital experts in the United States of America. The purpose of this paper is to share their insight and offer suggestions to address these challenges.

We used a qualitative thematic analysis approach and performed phone interviews with the top five congenital experts in the United States of America.

Experts unanimously felt that duty-hour restrictions have negatively affected congenital training programmes in the following ways: current fellows do not seem as conditioned as fellows in the past, patient handoffs are not consistent with excellent performance, the mentor–mentee relationship has been affected by duty-hour restrictions, and fellows may be less prepared for real-world practice. Three positive themes emerged in response to duty-hour restrictions: fellows appear to be doing less menial task work, fellows are now better rested for learning, and we are attracting more individuals into the speciality. Experts agreed that congenital fellowships should be increased to 2 years. There was support for both the traditional and integrated residency pathways.

We are in a new era of education and must work together to overcome the challenges that have arisen in recent years.