Supposedly program directors have access to the numbers, but the best resources are the residents themselves. Also, beware of what the program is considering "primaries." The term should ideally mean from start to finish, the resident did the case, from preparation and first incision to close-up and patching if necessary. In reality, the ACGME considers a case a primary if the resident does 50% or more of the case, with the resident doing the critical portions of the surgery. However, some programs and/or residents will try to weasel around this because reporting primaries are self-monitored. For instance, some logged primary vitrectomies may be no more than sticking in the vitrector handpiece and pressing down the pedal for a few seconds, barely enough to be called a core vitrectomy.
Best way of assessing the surgical training of a residency program is to see if there's a sentiment among residents of a) pursuing a fellowship to obtain more surgical experience in bread- and-butter surgeries like phacos, pterygiums, and blepharoplasties, b) not minding residency be extended another year for more surgical experience (I've heard this sentiment on one of my away rotations as a student; in hindsight, that should have been a red flag), and c) fellows are taking most of the surgeries, with the residents often being just the suture cutter or another set of hands. Hearing any of these three should give you pause, because a good program should make you comfortable with microsurgery by the time you start your PGY-4 year and capable of being self-sufficient in surgery mid-way or at the end of your PGY-4 year. Also, don't get too caught up on numbers; being well-taught counts more than doing more cases, and being taught how to do surgery properly is well worth a few less primaries.
