We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Invited Critique |

Complacency: The New Attitude of the Surgical Resident—Invited Critique

Bernard M. Jaffe, MD
Arch Surg. 2002;137(10):1197. doi:10.1001/archsurg.137.10.1197.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


Surgeons and trainees often refer to the 1960s and 1970s as the "days of the giants." It was an era of extraordinary surgical progress, including the development of parenteral nutrition, transplantation, and cardiac surgery. Training programs were also in their heyday, and chief residents were looked on as gods by their juniors. I trained during this golden age, and I recognized that it was a real privilege. However, despite the remarkable talent of my attending physicians and the strength of the resident corps, many things were wrong with residency programs in that period. Salaries were at the poverty level, and we all had desperate financial problems; imagine supporting a wife and child on $100 a month. The pyramidal system kept residents on their toes, but we were afraid to err not because it might harm a patient but because we might not make the cut. The work hours were appalling, and call schedules generally ranged from every other day to 2 out of 3 days. There was certainly no time for family life or play. Although the conferences were great because the attending surgeons were brilliant, there was no structured educational program, and we had to learn everything on our own. Scut work was a constant source of harassment.

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview





Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature
Clinical Scenario

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature
Matching Content and Context: Evidence-Based Teaching Scripts