A critical evaluation of the morbidity and mortality conference

Kenric M. Murayama*, Anna M. Derossis, Debra A. DaRosa, Heather B. Sherman, Jonathan P. Fryer

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

71 Scopus citations


Background: This study was designed to evaluate the impact of changes made to our morbidity and mortality (M&M) conference. Methods: A 23-item survey using corresponding Likert-type scales was created. Faculty and residents were asked to anonymously complete the surveys in June 1999. Based on this information, specific modifications were made to the conference. The same survey was administered to faculty and residents in the Fall of 2000. Analysis was performed using Student t tests. Results: Postsurvey findings showed residents felt eight components improved significantly (P <0.05). Faculty noted nonsignificant improvement in nine survey items and decline in nine items (five unchanged). Conclusions: Changes in content and structure made to enhance our M&M conference's educational value resulted in significant improvements as perceived by the surgical residents. Interestingly, these changes had only minimal impact on faculty perceptions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)246-250
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican journal of surgery
Issue number3
StatePublished - 2002


  • Education
  • Morbidity
  • Mortality
  • Surgery conferences

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery


Dive into the research topics of 'A critical evaluation of the morbidity and mortality conference'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this