Fresh frozen cadaver workshops for general surgical training

Debbi Q. Chai, Richard Naunton-Morgan, Jeffrey Hamdorf

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Citations (Scopus)


Background: The technical proficiency of a surgeon is intricately linked to training and experience. Reduction in working hours, decreased operating time and ethical imperatives to protect patients have all resulted in a decrease in hands-on experience. The introduction of laparoscopic procedures has also decreased trainees' exposure to open operative procedures not routinely performed in the current era. Methods: The Clinical Training and Evaluation Centre at The University of Western Australia introduced the Core Skills Workshop for general surgical trainees in 2007. The workshop provides cadaveric dissection time for a range of open procedures. We describe in this article the logistics of setting up and running a cadaveric workshop, the performance and report our trainees' evaluation of the workshop. Results: The Clinical Training and Evaluation Centre has hosted 26 General Surgery Core Skills Workshops since 2007. There were 227 participants with 196 evaluations returned (response rate 86%). Feedback was strongly positive for the course meeting the participants' expectations as well as its contribution to their skillset. Participants value the use of cadavers and high instructor:student ratios along with performance of a large number of open procedures in the setting of a stress-free workshop and looked forward to more similar courses in the future. Conclusions: Fresh frozen cadaver workshops are of value in the face of current surgical training challenges in providing an efficient, effective and safe environment.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1428-1431
Number of pages4
JournalANZ Journal of Surgery
Issue number11
Early online date23 May 2019
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2019


Dive into the research topics of 'Fresh frozen cadaver workshops for general surgical training'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this