European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care in Spain: Results for the part 1 and part 2 exams in the last five years. Are we going in the right direction? / Diploma Europeo en Anestesiología y Cuidados Intensivos en España: resultados de los exámenes de las partes 1 y 2 de los últimos cinco años. ¿Vamos por el buen camino?

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (EDAIC) has become a standard of quality among Spanish anaesthesiologists. The aim of this retrospective observational study was to assess the results of Spanish participants for the Part1 and Part2 exams over a recent five years period from 2012 to 2016 and 2013 to 2017, respectively. MATERIAL AND METHODS: After obtaining the authorization from the European Society of Anaesthesiology, the results of both parts of the EDAIC exams were anonymously analysed for five years. We analysed the number of registrations, the pass rates, the cause for failure and the mean scores for basic sciences (paperA of part1 exam and the two first vivas of part2 exam) and clinical anaesthesia and intensive care (paperB of part1 exam and the two last vivas of part2 exam). Quantitative variables were analysed using the one-way analysis of variance, and qualitative variables using the chi-square test for trends. The level of statistical significance was set at P<.05. RESULTS: For the written part1 exam, 1,189 of a total of 10,954 candidates (10.85%) were registered in Spanish centres, reflecting the global growth of the exam (P=.29). The pass rate was 62.1%, with no significant differences from other countries (P=.38). Basic sciences were involved in 84.1% of failing candidates. Mean scores were 71.74±5.98% for basic science (paperA) and 74.48±4.29% for clinical anaesthesiology (paperB). Regarding the part2 exam, 72.4% of the candidates who had passed the part1 exam registered for the oral part2, with a pass rate of 62.7% versus 62.2% in the rest of the world (P=.91). Failing in the basic sciences sections of the part2 resulted in 93.8% of candidates failing the part2 exam. Bad fails were registered in 56 (31.5%) of failing candidates, of which 71.3% occurred in the basic sciences vivas. Isolated bad fails only occurred in 7 (3.9%) cases. CONCLUSIONS: The evolution of the EDAIC in Spain has been very similar to evolution of the EDAIC in the rest of the world. Further efforts to improve knowledge in basic sciences and better preparation in the technique of oral examination should improve the pass rate of the EDAIC examinations from an ever-increasing cohort of candidates.