How do validity experts conceptualise argumentation? It's a rhetorical question.

INTRODUCTION: Health professions education (HPE) has adopted the conceptualization of validity as an argument. However, the theoretical and practical aspects of how validity arguments should be developed, used and evaluated in HPE have not been deeply explored. Articulating the argumentation theory undergirding validity and validation can help HPE better operationalise validity as an argument. To better understand this, the authors explored how HPE validity scholars conceptualise assessment validity arguments and argumentation, seeking to understand potential consequences of these views on validation practices. METHODS: The authors used critical case sampling to identify HPE assessment validity experts in three ways: (1) participation in a prominent validity research group, (2) appearing in a bibliometric study of HPE validity publications and (3) authorship of recent HPE validity literature. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 experts in HPE assessment validity from four different countries. The authors used reflexive thematic analysis to develop themes relevant to their research question. RESULTS: The authors developed three themes grounded in participants' responses: (1) In theory, HPE validity is a social and situated argument. (2) In practice, the absence of audience and evaluation stymies the social nature of HPE validity. (3) Lack of validity argumentation creates and maintains power differentials within HPE. Participants articulated that current HPE validation practices are rooted in post-positivist epistemology when they should be situated (i.e. context-dependent), audience-centric and inclusive. DISCUSSION: When discussing validity argumentation in theory, participants' descriptions reflect an interpretivist lens for evaluation that is misaligned with real-world validity practices. This misalignment likely arises from HPE's adoption of "validity as an argument" as a slogan, without integrating theoretical and practical principles of argumentation theory.

Competency-based medical education: The spark to ignite healthcare's escape fire.

High-value care is what patients deserve and what healthcare professionals should deliver. However, it is not what happens much of the time. Quality improvement master Dr. Don Berwick argued more than two decades ago that American healthcare needs an escape fire, which is a new way of seeing and acting in a crisis situation. While coined in the U.S. context, the analogy applies in other Western healthcare contexts as well. Therefore, in this paper, the authors revisit Berwick's analogy, arguing that medical education can, and should, provide the spark for such an escape fire across the globe. They assert that medical education can achieve this by fully embracing competency-based medical education (CBME) as a way to place medicine's focus on the patient. CBME targets training outcomes that prepare graduates to optimize patient care. The authors use the escape fire analogy to argue that medical educators must drop long-held approaches and tools; treat CBME implementation as an adaptive challenge rather than a technical fix; demand genuine, rich discussions and engagement about the path forward; and, above all, center the patient in all they do.

A realist synthesis of prospective entrustment decision making by entrustment or clinical competency committees.

INTRODUCTION: The real-world mechanisms underlying prospective entrustment decision making (PEDM) by entrustment or clinical competency committees (E/CCCs) are poorly understood. To advance understanding in this area, the authors conducted a realist synthesis of the published literature to address the following research question: In E/CCC efforts to make defensible prospective entrustment decisions (PEDs), what works, for whom, under what circumstances and why? METHODS: Realist work seeks to understand the contexts (C), mechanisms (M) and outcomes (O) that explain how and why things work (or do not). In the authors' study, contexts included individual E/CCC members, E/CCC structures and processes, and training programmes. The outcome (i.e. desired outcome) was a PED. Mechanisms were a substantial focus of the analysis and informed the core findings. To define a final corpus of 52 included papers, the authors searched four databases, screened all results from those searches and performed a full-text review of a subset of screened papers. Data extraction focused on developing context-mechanism-outcome configurations from the papers, which were used to create a theory for how PEDM leads to PEDs. RESULTS: PEDM is often driven by default (non-deliberate) decision making rather than a deliberate process of deciding whether a trainee should be entrusted or not. When defaulting, some E/CCCs find red flags that sometimes lead to being more deliberate with decision making. E/CCCs that seek to be deliberate describe PEDM that can be effortful (when data are insufficient or incongruent) or effortless (when data are robust and tell a congruent story about a trainee). Both information about trainee trustworthiness and the sufficiency of data about trainee performance influence PEDM. Several moderators influence what is considered to be sufficient data, how trustworthiness data are viewed and how PEDM is carried out. These include perceived consequences and associated risks, E/CCC member trust propensity, E/CCC member personal knowledge of and experience with trainees and E/CCC structures and processes. DISCUSSION: PEDM is rarely deliberate but should be. Data about trainee trustworthiness are foundational to making PEDs. Bias, equity and fairness are nearly absent from the papers in this synthesis, and future efforts must seek to advance understanding and practice regarding the roles of bias, equity and fairness in PEDM.

"Rater training" re-imagined for work-based assessment in medical education.

In this perspective, the authors critically examine "rater training" as it has been conceptualized and used in medical education. By "rater training," they mean the educational events intended to improve rater performance and contributions during assessment events. Historically, rater training programs have focused on modifying faculty behaviours to achieve psychometric ideals (e.g., reliability, inter-rater reliability, accuracy). The authors argue these ideals may now be poorly aligned with contemporary research informing work-based assessment, introducing a compatibility threat, with no clear direction on how to proceed. To address this issue, the authors provide a brief historical review of "rater training" and provide an analysis of the literature examining the effectiveness of rater training programs. They focus mainly on what has served to define effectiveness or improvements. They then draw on philosophical and conceptual shifts in assessment to demonstrate why the function, effectiveness aims, and structure of rater training requires reimagining. These include shifting competencies for assessors, viewing assessment as a complex cognitive task enacted in a social context, evolving views on biases, and reprioritizing which validity evidence should be most sought in medical education. The authors aim to advance the discussion on rater training by challenging implicit incompatibility issues and stimulating ways to overcome them. They propose that "rater training" (a moniker they suggest be reserved for strong psychometric aims) be augmented with "assessor readiness" programs that link to contemporary assessment science and enact the principle of compatibility between that science and ways of engaging with advances in real-world faculty-learner contexts.

Developing the Expected Entrustment Score: Accounting for Variation in Resident Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Clinical competency committees (CCCs) and residency program leaders may find it difficult to interpret workplace-based assessment (WBA) ratings knowing that contextual factors and bias play a large role. OBJECTIVE: We describe the development of an expected entrustment score for resident performance within the context of our well-developed Observable Practice Activity (OPA) WBA system. DESIGN: Observational study PARTICIPANTS: Internal medicine residents MAIN MEASURE: Entrustment KEY RESULTS: Each individual resident had observed entrustment scores with a unique relationship to the expected entrustment scores. Many residents' observed scores oscillated closely around the expected scores. However, distinct performance patterns did emerge. CONCLUSIONS: We used regression modeling and leveraged large numbers of historical WBA data points to produce an expected entrustment score that served as a guidepost for performance interpretation.

Assessing trainee performance: ensuring learner control, supporting development, and maximizing assessment moments.

In this article, the authors provide practical guidance for frontline supervisors' efforts to assess trainee performance. They focus on three areas. First, they argue the importance of promoting learner control in the assessment process, noting that providing learners agency and control can shift the stakes of assessment from high to low and promote a safe environment that facilitates learning. Second, they posit that assessment should be used to support continued development by promoting a relational partnership between trainees and supervisors. This partnership allows supervisors to reinforce desirable aspects of performance, provide real-time support for deficient areas of performance, and sequence learning with the appropriate amount of scaffolding to push trainees from competence (what they can do alone) to capability (what they are able to do with support). Finally, they advocate the importance of optimizing the use of written comments and direct observation while also recognizing that performance is interdependent in efforts to maximize assessment moments.Conclusion: Using best practices in trainee assessment can help trainees take next steps in their development in a learner-centered partnership with clinical supervisors. What is Known: • Many pediatricians are asked to assess the performance of medical students and residents they work with but few have received formal training in assessment. What is New: • This article presents evidence-based best practices for assessing trainees, including giving trainees agency in the assessment process and focusing on helping trainees take next steps in their development.

How argumentation theory can inform assessment validity: A critical review.

INTRODUCTION: Many health professions education (HPE) scholars frame assessment validity as a form of argumentation in which interpretations and uses of assessment scores must be supported by evidence. However, what are purported to be validity arguments are often merely clusters of evidence without a guiding framework to evaluate, prioritise, or debate their merits. Argumentation theory is a field of study dedicated to understanding the production, analysis, and evaluation of arguments (spoken or written). The aim of this study is to describe argumentation theory, articulating the unique insights it can offer to HPE assessment, and presenting how different argumentation orientations can help reconceptualize the nature of validity in generative ways. METHODS: The authors followed a five-step critical review process consisting of iterative cycles of focusing, searching, appraising, sampling, and analysing the argumentation theory literature. The authors generated and synthesised a corpus of manuscripts on argumentation orientations deemed to be most applicable to HPE. RESULTS: We selected two argumentation orientations that we considered particularly constructive for informing HPE assessment validity: New rhetoric and informal logic. In new rhetoric, the goal of argumentation is to persuade, with a focus on an audience's values and standards. Informal logic centres on identifying, structuring, and evaluating arguments in real-world settings, with a variety of normative standards used to evaluate argument validity. DISCUSSION: Both new rhetoric and informal logic provide philosophical, theoretical, or practical groundings that can advance HPE validity argumentation. New rhetoric's foregrounding of audience aligns with HPE's social imperative to be accountable to specific stakeholders such as the public and learners. Informal logic provides tools for identifying and structuring validity arguments for analysis and evaluation.

Making prospective entrustment decisions: Knowing limits, seeking help and defaulting.

INTRODUCTION: Many studies focused on entrustment have not considered prospective entrustment decisions, where clinical competency and entrustment committees determine how much supervision trainees will require in the future for tasks occurring in not completely known contexts. The authors sought to explore factors that influence and determine prospective entrustment decisions made by members of such committees in graduate medical education (GME) and undergraduate medical education (UME). METHODS: The authors conducted a constructivist grounded theory study with 23 faculty participants from GME and UME clinical competency and entrustment committees in the United States between October 2020 and March 2021. Interviews sought to explore factors and considerations participants weigh in making prospective entrustment decisions about trainees. Data collection and analysis occurred in an iterative fashion, ensuring constant comparison. Theoretical sampling was used to confirm, disconfirm and elaborate on the evolving results. RESULTS: Trainees' ability to know limits and seek help is the foundation of participants' prospective entrustment decision making. Most participants, however, describe a presumption of trainee readiness to progress and describe commonly making default prospective entrustment decisions unless 'red flags' in performance are present. Although participants desire sufficient and trusted data about trainee performance to inform decisions, they often lack it. Finally, the perceived permanence and consequences of prospective entrustment decisions influence how participants weigh other factors contributing to prospective entrustment decisions. CONCLUSION: Trainees' ability to know limits and seek help appears to be the foundation of prospective entrustment decision making. Training programmes should strive to collect and employ robust data supporting and questioning the presence of these attributes.

Development and evaluation of a pediatric hospital medicine board review course.

BACKGROUND: The American Board of Medical Specialties recognized Pediatric Hospital Medicine (PHM) for subspecialty certification in 2016, with the first certification exam in 2019. To address the need for exam preparatory materials, we designed and evaluated a novel PHM board review course that was offered both in-person and online. METHODS: Course content was based on the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP) PHM certifying exam outline. Course objectives were developed from published PHM core competencies and the 2012 ABP general pediatrics content objectives. National experts served as faculty, presenting didactic sessions, and contributing to a question bank for high-yield review. For program evaluation, we applied the Kirkpatrick Model, evaluating estimated exam pass rates (Level 4), participant learning (Level 2) via post-presentation practice questions, and participants' ratings of presenters (via five-point Likert scale) and satisfaction (Level 1). RESULTS: There were 112 in-person and 144 online participants with estimated pass rates of 89 and 93%, respectively. The mean correct response for the post-presentation knowledge questions was 84%. Faculty effectiveness ratings ranged from 3.81 to 4.96 (median score 4.60). Strengths included the pace of the course, question bank, and printed syllabus. Suggestions for improvement included question bank expansion, focus on "testable" points rather than general information, and challenges with long days of didactic presentations. CONCLUSIONS: This novel PHM board review course demonstrated effectiveness. Hospitalists preferred focused "testable" information, an active learning environment, and a robust question bank. Future preparatory courses should consider including more opportunities for practice questions, focused content review, and learner engagement.

See One, Do One, Forget One: Early Skill Decay After Paracentesis Training.

INTRODUCTION: Internal medicine residents perform paracentesis, but programs lack standard methods for assessing competence or maintenance of competence and instead rely on number of procedures completed. This study describes differences in resident competence in paracentesis over time. METHODS: From 2016 to 2017, internal medicine residents (n = 118) underwent paracentesis simulation training. Competence was assessed using the Paracentesis Competency Assessment Tool (PCAT), which combines a checklist, global scale, and entrustment score. The PCAT also delineates two categorical cut-point scores: the Minimum Passing Standard (MPS) and the Unsupervised Practice Standard (UPS). Residents were randomized to return to the simulation lab at 3 and 6 months (group A, n = 60) or only 6 months (group B, n = 58). At each session, faculty raters assessed resident performance. Data were analyzed to compare resident performance at each session compared with initial training scores, and performance between groups at 6 months. RESULTS: After initial training, all residents met the MPS. The number achieving UPS did not differ between groups: group A = 24 (40%), group B = 20 (34.5%), p = 0.67. When group A was retested at 3 months, performance on each PCAT component significantly declined, as did the proportion of residents meeting the MPS and UPS. At the 6-month test, residents in group A performed significantly better than residents in group B, with 52 (89.7%) and 20 (34.5%) achieving the MPS and UPS, respectively, in group A compared with 25 (46.3%) and 2 (3.70%) in group B (p < .001 for both comparison). DISCUSSION: Skill in paracentesis declines as early as 3 months after training. However, retraining may help interrupt skill decay. Only a small proportion of residents met the UPS 6 months after training. This suggests using the PCAT to objectively measure competence would reclassify residents from being permitted to perform paracentesis independently to needing further supervision.

Development of Resident-Sensitive Quality Measures for Inpatient General Internal Medicine.

BACKGROUND: Graduate medical education (GME) training has long-lasting effects on patient care quality. Despite this, few GME programs use clinical care measures as part of resident assessment. Furthermore, there is no gold standard to identify clinical care measures that are reflective of resident care. Resident-sensitive quality measures (RSQMs), defined as "measures that are meaningful in patient care and are most likely attributable to resident care," have been developed using consensus methodology and piloted in pediatric emergency medicine. However, this approach has not been tested in internal medicine (IM). OBJECTIVE: To develop RSQMs for a general internal medicine (GIM) inpatient residency rotation using previously described consensus methods. DESIGN: The authors used two consensus methods, nominal group technique (NGT) and a subsequent Delphi method, to generate RSQMs for a GIM inpatient rotation. RSQMs were generated for specific clinical conditions found on a GIM inpatient rotation, as well as for general care on a GIM ward. PARTICIPANTS: NGT participants included nine IM and medicine-pediatrics (MP) residents and six IM and MP faculty members. The Delphi group included seven IM and MP residents and seven IM and MP faculty members. MAIN MEASURES: The number and description of RSQMs generated during this process. KEY RESULTS: Consensus methods resulted in 89 RSQMs with the following breakdown by condition: GIM general care-21, diabetes mellitus-16, hyperkalemia-14, COPD-13, hypertension-11, pneumonia-10, and hypokalemia-4. All RSQMs were process measures, with 48% relating to documentation and 51% relating to orders. Fifty-eight percent of RSQMs were related to the primary admitting diagnosis, while 42% could also be related to chronic comorbidities that require management during an admission. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus methods resulted in 89 RSQMs for a GIM inpatient service. While all RSQMs were process measures, they may still hold value in learner assessment, formative feedback, and program evaluation.

If we could turn back time: Imagining time-variable, competency-based medical education in the context of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed a paradox in historical models of medical education: organizations responsible for applying consistent standards for progression have needed to adapt to training environments marked by inconsistency and change. Although some institutions have maintained their traditional requirements, others have accelerated their programs to rush nearly graduated trainees to the front lines. One interpretation of the unplanned shortening of the duration of training programs during a crisis is that standards have been lowered. But it is also possible that these trainees were examined according to the same standards as usual and were judged to have already met them. This paper discusses the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the current workforce, provides an analysis of how competency-based medical education (CBME) in the context of the pandemic might have mitigated wide-scale disruption, and identifies structural barriers to achieving an ideal state. The paper further calls upon universities, health centres, governments, certifying bodies, regulatory authorities, and health care professionals to work collectively on a truly time-variable model of CBME. The pandemic has made clear that time variability in medical education already exists and should be adopted widely and formally. If our systems today had used a framework of outcome competencies, sequenced progression, tailored learning, focused instruction, and programmatic assessment, we may have been even more nimble in changing our systems to care for our patients with COVID-19.

On the validity of summative entrustment decisions.

Health care revolves around trust. Patients are often in a position that gives them no other choice than to trust the people taking care of them. Educational programs thus have the responsibility to develop physicians who can be trusted to deliver safe and effective care, ultimately making a final decision to entrust trainees to graduate to unsupervised practice. Such entrustment decisions deserve to be scrutinized for their validity. This end-of-training entrustment decision is arguably the most important one, although earlier entrustment decisions, for smaller units of professional practice, should also be scrutinized for their validity. Validity of entrustment decisions implies a defensible argument that can be analyzed in components that together support the decision. According to Kane, building a validity argument is a process designed to support inferences of scoring, generalization across observations, extrapolation to new instances, and implications of the decision. A lack of validity can be caused by inadequate evidence in terms of, according to Messick, content, response process, internal structure (coherence) and relationship to other variables, and in misinterpreted consequences. These two leading frameworks (Kane and Messick) in educational and psychological testing can be well applied to summative entrustment decision-making. The authors elaborate the types of questions that need to be answered to arrive at defensible, well-argued summative decisions regarding performance to provide a grounding for high-quality safe patient care.

Capturing outcomes of competency-based medical education: The call and the challenge.

There is an urgent need to capture the outcomes of the ongoing global implementation of competency-based medical education (CBME). However, the measurement of downstream outcomes following educational innovations, such as CBME is fraught with challenges stemming from the complexities of medical training, the breadth and variability of inputs, and the difficulties attributing outcomes to specific educational elements. In this article, we present a logic model for CBME to conceptualize an impact pathway relating to CBME and facilitate outcomes evaluation. We further identify six strategies to mitigate the challenges of outcomes measurement: (1) clearly identify the outcome of interest, (2) distinguish between outputs and outcomes, (3) carefully consider attribution versus contribution, (4) connect outcomes to the fidelity and integrity of implementation, (5) pay attention to unanticipated outcomes, and (6) embrace methodological pluralism. Embracing these challenges, we argue that careful and thoughtful evaluation strategies will move us forward in answering the all-important question: Are the desired outcomes of CBME being achieved?

Growth mindset in competency-based medical education.

The ongoing adoption of competency-based medical education (CBME) across health professions training draws focus to learner-centred educational design and the importance of fostering a growth mindset in learners, teachers, and educational programs. An emerging body of literature addresses the instructional practices and features of learning environments that foster the skills and strategies necessary for trainees to be partners in their own learning and progression to competence and to develop skills for lifelong learning. Aligned with this emerging area is an interest in Dweck's self theory and the concept of the growth mindset. The growth mindset is an implicit belief held by an individual that intelligence and abilities are changeable, rather than fixed and immutable. In this paper, we present an overview of the growth mindset and how it aligns with the goals of CBME. We describe the challenges associated with shifting away from the fixed mindset of most traditional medical education assumptions and practices and discuss potential solutions and strategies at the individual, relational, and systems levels. Finally, we present future directions for research to better understand the growth mindset in the context of CBME.

Competency-based time-variable training internationally: Ensuring practical next steps in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Competency-based medical education has been advocated as the future of medical education for nearly a half-century. Inherent to this is the promise that advancement and transitions in training would be defined by readiness to practice rather than by time. Of the logistical problems facing competency-based, time-variable (CBTV) training, enacting time variability may be the largest hurdle to clear. Although it is true that an 'all or nothing' approach to CBTV training would require massive overhauls of both medical education and health care systems, the authors propose that training institutions should gradually evolve within their current environments to incrementally move toward the best version of CBTV training for learners, supervisors, and patients. In support of this evolution, the authors seek to demonstrate the feasibility of advancing toward the goal of realistic CBTV training by detailing examples of successful CBTV training and describing key features of initial steps toward CBTV training implementation.

Outcomes of competency-based medical education: A taxonomy for shared language.

As the global transformation of postgraduate medical training continues, there are persistent calls for program evaluation efforts to understand the impact and outcomes of competency-based medical education (CBME) implementation. The measurement of a complex educational intervention such as CBME is challenging because of the multifaceted nature of activities and outcomes. What is needed, therefore, is an organizational taxonomy to both conceptualize and categorize multiple outcomes. In this manuscript we propose a taxonomy that builds on preceding works to organize CBME outcomes across three domains: focus (educational, clinical), level (micro, meso, macro), and timeline (training, transition to practice, practice). We also provide examples of how to conceptualize outcomes of educational interventions across medical specialties using this taxonomy. By proposing a shared language for outcomes of CBME, we hope that this taxonomy will help organize ongoing evaluation work and catalyze those seeking to engage in the evaluation effort to help understand the impact and outcomes of CBME.

Linking Workplace-Based Assessment to ACGME Milestones: A Comparison of Mapping Strategies in Two Specialties.

Construct: The construct that is assessed is competency in Pediatrics and Internal Medicine residency training. Background: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) created milestones to measure learner progression toward competence over time but not as direct assessment tools. Ideal measurement of resident performance includes direct observation and assessment of patient care skills in the workplace. Residency programs have linked these concepts by mapping workplace-based assessments to the milestones of ACGME subcompetencies. Mapping is a subjective process, and little is known about specific techniques or the resulting consequences of mapping program-specific assessment data to larger frameworks of competency. Approach: In this article, the authors compare and contrast the techniques used to link workplace-based assessments called Observable Practice Activities (OPAs) to ACGME subcompetencies in two large academic residency programs from different specialties (Internal Medicine and Pediatrics). Descriptive analysis explored the similarities and differences in the assessment data generated by mapping assessment items to larger frameworks of competency. Results: Each program assessed the core competencies with similar frequencies. The largest discrepancy between the two subspecialties was the assessment of Medical Knowledge, which Internal Medicine assessed twice as often. Pediatrics also assessed the core competency Systems-based Practice almost twice as often as Internal Medicine. Both programs had several subcompetencies that were assessed more or less often than what appeared to be emphasized by the blueprint of mapping. Despite using independent mapping processes, both programs mapped each OPA to approximately three subcompetencies. Conclusions: Mapping workplace-based assessments to the ACGME subcompetencies allowed each program to see the whole of their curricula in ways that were not possible before and to identify existing curricular and assessment gaps. Although each program used similar assessment tools, the assessment data generated were different. The lessons learned in this work could inform other programs attempting to link their own workplace-based assessment elements to ACGME subcompetencies.

Hospitalist-Operated Compression Ultrasonography: a Point-of-Care Ultrasound Study (HOCUS-POCUS).

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism includes deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism. Compression ultrasonography is the most common way to evaluate DVT and is typically performed by sonographers and interpreted by radiologists. Yet there is evidence that ultrasound examinations can be safely and accurately performed by clinicians at the bedside. OBJECTIVE: To measure the operating characteristics of hospital medicine providers performing point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) for evaluation of DVT. DESIGN: This is a prospective cohort study enrolling a convenience sample of patients. Hospital medicine providers performed POCUS for DVT and the results were compared with the corresponding formal vascular study (FVS) interpreted by radiologists. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized non-ICU patients at four tertiary care hospitals for whom a DVT ultrasound was ordered. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcomes were the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of the POCUS compression ultrasound compared with a FVS. The secondary outcome was the elapsed time between order and the POCUS study compared with the time the FVS was ordered to when the formal radiology report was finalized. KEY RESULTS: One hundred twenty-five limbs from 73 patients were scanned. The prevalence of DVT was 6.4% (8/125). The sensitivity of POCUS for DVT was 100% (95% CI 74-100%) and specificity was 95.8% (95% CI 91-98%) with a positive predictive value of 61.5% (95% CI 35-84%) and a negative predictive value of 100% (95% CI 98-100%). The median time from order to POCUS completion was 5.8 h versus 11.5 h median time from order until the radiology report was finalized (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Hospital medicine providers can perform compression-only POCUS for DVT on inpatients with accuracy similar to other specialties and settings, with results available sooner than radiology. The observed prevalence of DVT was lower than expected. POCUS may be reliable in excluding DVT but further study is required to determine how to incorporate a positive POCUS DVT result into clinical practice.