Identification, Characterization, and Ranking of Candidate Metrics for Selection to Anesthesiology Residency: An Iterative Survey of Program Directors.

Background: The primary aim of this study was to identify and stratify candidate metrics used by anesthesiology residency program directors (PDs) to develop their residency rank lists through the National Resident Matching Program. Methods: Sixteen PDs comprised the participants, selected for diversity in geography and program size. We used a 3-round iterative survey to identify and stratify candidate metrics. In the first round, participants listed metrics they planned to use to evaluate candidates. In the second round, metrics from the first round were ranked by importance, and criteria were solicited to define an exceptional, strong, average, marginal, and uncompetitive candidate for each metric. In the third round, aggregated results were presented and participants refined their rankings. Results: Of the 16 PDs selected, 15 participated in the first and second survey rounds, and 10 in the third. Eighteen candidate metrics were indicated by 8 or more PDs for residency selection. All 10 PDs from the final round identified passing Step 1 of the United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) and the absence of "red flags" like a failed rotation as key selection metrics, both averaging an importance score of 4.9 out of 5. Other metrics identified by all PDs included clerkship evaluation comments, USMLE Step 2 scores, class rank, letters of recommendation, personal statement, and program and geographical signals. Conclusions: The study reveals key metrics anesthesiology residency PDs use for candidate ranking, which may offer candidates insights into their competitiveness for anesthesiology residency.

Pro-Con Debate: Electroencephalography-Guided Anesthesia for Reducing Postoperative Delirium.

Postoperative delirium (POD) has significant implications on morbidity, mortality, and health care expenditures. Monitoring electroencephalography (EEG) to adjust anesthetic management has gained interest as a strategy to mitigate POD. In this Pro-Con commentary article, the pro side supports the use of EEG to reduce POD, citing an empiric reduction in POD with processed EEG (pEEG)-guided general anesthesia found in several studies and recent meta-analysis. The Electroencephalography Guidance of Anesthesia to Alleviate Geriatric Syndromes (ENGAGES) trial is the exception to this, and issues with methods and achieved depths are discussed. Meanwhile, the Con side advocates that the use of EEG to reduce POD is not yet certain, citing that there is a lack of evidence that associations between anesthetic depth and POD represent causal relationships. The Con side also contends that the ideal EEG signatures to guide anesthetic titration are currently unknown, and the potential benefits of reduced anesthesia levels may be outweighed by the risks of potentially insufficient anesthetic administration. As the public health burden of POD increases, anesthesia clinicians will be tasked to consider interventions to mitigate risk such as EEG. This Pro-Con debate will provide 2 perspectives on the evidence and rationales for using EEG to mitigate POD.

Mental Health Questions on State Medical License Applications and Evaluation of Updates.

This cross-sectional study evaluates the consistency of US medical license renewal applications with the Federation of State Medical Boards recommendations for questions regarding physician mental health.

Measuring deliberate reflection in residents: validation and psychometric properties of a measurement tool.

PURPOSE: Reflective capacity is "the ability to understand critical analysis of knowledge and experience to achieve deeper meaning." In medicine, there is little provision for post-graduate medical education to teach deliberate reflection. The feasibility, scoring characteristics, reliability, validation, and adaptability of a modified previously validated instrument was examined for its usefulness assessing reflective capacity in residents as a step toward developing interventions for improvement. METHODS: Third-year residents and fellows from four anesthesia training programs were administered a slightly modified version of the Reflection Evaluation for Learners' Enhanced Competencies Tool (REFLECT) in a prospective, observational study at the end of the 2019 academic year. Six written vignettes of imperfect anesthesia situations were created. Subjects recorded their perspectives on two randomly assigned vignettes. Responses were scored using a 5-element rubric; average scores were analyzed for psychometric properties. An independent self-report assessment method, the Cognitive Behavior Survey: Residency Level (rCBS) was used to examine construct validity. Internal consistency (ICR, Cronbach's alpha) and interrater reliability (weighted kappa) were examined. Pearson correlations were used between the two measures of reflective capacity. RESULTS: 46/136 invited subjects completed 2/6 randomly assigned vignettes. Interrater agreement was high (k = 0.85). The overall average REFLECT score was 1.8 (1-4 scale) with good distribution across the range of scores. ICR for both the REFLECT score (mean 1.8, sd 0.5; α = 0.92) and the reflection scale of the rCBS (mean 4.5, sd 1.1; α = 0.94) were excellent. There was a significant correlation between REFLECT score and the rCBS reflection scale (r = .44, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates feasibility, reliability, and sufficiently robust psychometric properties of a modified REFLECT rubric to assess graduate medical trainees' reflective capacity and established construct/convergent validity to an independent measure. The instrument has the potential to assess the effectiveness of interventions intended to improve reflective capacity.

Left-Sided Double-Lumen Tube vs EZ-Blocker for One-Lung Ventilation in Thoracic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background. The EZ-Blocker is the newest generation of bronchial blocker and offers a potential alternative to left-sided double lumen tubes for lung isolation and one-lung ventilation during thoracic surgery. Methods. Databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing left-sided double lumen tube to the EZ-Blocker for one-lung ventilation during thoracic surgery. The time for placement, incidence of intraoperative displacement, and surgeons' rating of lung collapse quality were designated as coprimary outcomes. The safety profiles of the two devices, including the incidence of airway trauma and post-extubation discomfort were also examined. Results. Six randomized controlled trials (495 patients) were analyzed. Compared to the EZ-Blocker, the left-sided double lumen tube was faster to place by a weighted mean difference of [95% CI] of -61.24 seconds [-102.48, -20.00] (P = .004) and was much less likely to become displaced during lung isolation with an odds ratio [95% CI] of .56 [.34, .91] (P = .02). The left-sided double lumen tube and the EZ-Blocker provided similar surgeon-rated quality of lung isolation. Although the left-sided double lumen tube caused a greater degree of post-extubation sore throat, there was a similar incidence of carinal trauma and post-extubation hoarseness compared to the EZ-Blocker. Conclusion. Our analysis suggests that the left-sided double lumen tube can be placed more quickly and is less prone to intraoperative displacement compared to the EZ-Blocker; the quality of lung collapse is similar. Thus, evidence appears to support the continued utilization of the left-sided double lumen tube for routine thoracic surgery requiring one-lung ventilation.

Doing More With Written Feedback: Improving Learner Satisfaction and Reflection With the LEAF (Learner-Engaged Analysis of Feedback) Method.

PROBLEM: Written feedback is often overly positive, nonspecific, and difficult to interpret. Learner satisfaction with written feedback is low and obtaining written feedback that encourages self-reflection is challenging. Improving feedback quality is laborious and only modestly effective. APPROACH: The authors developed the LEAF (Learner-Engaged Analysis of Feedback) method to improve learner satisfaction with, and reflection on, existing written feedback. The method pairs a learner and coach to methodically identify themes in the learner's written feedback. Themes occurring more frequently or less frequently than typical offer areas for reflection, as they may identify learners' relative strengths or weaknesses. The method was introduced at the Massachusetts General Hospital in 2017 during program director (PD) meetings with anesthesiology residents. In 2018, resident satisfaction was measured (1 to 5 Likert-type questions, 1 = "not at all satisfied," 5 = "extremely satisfied") for 4 feedback sources, 2 related to the LEAF method (PD meetings, written feedback) and 2 unrelated (verbal feedback, mentor feedback). Residents' comments were qualitatively assessed to explore the impact on self-reflection. OUTCOMES: Residents who had participated in a LEAF session (n = 54), compared with those who had not (n = 11), reported higher satisfaction with written feedback (mean 3.1 versus 2.5, d = 0.53, P = .03) and PD meeting feedback (mean 3.8 versus 2.8, d = 0.80, P = .03). There were no significant differences between groups for satisfaction with feedback unrelated to the LEAF method. Qualitative analysis of comments suggested that residents found the method useful for providing holistic self-assessment, facilitating goal setting, uncovering blind spots, and improving feedback interpretation. NEXT STEPS: Next steps should include studies determining if the association between increased learner satisfaction with written feedback and the LEAF method is causal, and whether this feedback process changes learners' subsequent behaviors.

Establishing Psychological Safety to Obtain Feedback for Training Programs: A Novel Cross-Specialty Focus Group Exchange.

BACKGROUND: Formative feedback from residents is essential to improve residency programs, and focus groups may provide rich information. However, residents may withhold information due to fear of retaliation or speak less candidly to please focus group moderators. OBJECTIVE: We assessed participant perceptions and utility of feedback obtained from a confidential focus group exchange between 2 residency programs. METHODS: Anesthesiology and pediatric programs at the same institution participated in 2017. Residents voluntarily provided program feedback during 1 of 2 confidential focus groups for each program. Each focus group was moderated by the program director (PD) of the other specialty. The PDs used thematic analysis to identify themes for use by the respective programs in improvement efforts. An anonymous survey was distributed after the focus groups to collect participant perceptions (quantitative and narrative) on this approach. RESULTS: Thirteen residents of 140 (9.3%) participated (7 anesthesiology, 6 pediatrics). Thematic feedback from focus groups was largely consistent with known issues, although novel information was also obtained (eg, pediatric interns wanted earlier one-on-one meetings with their PD). Survey data suggest that residents were able to share more meaningful feedback than they would otherwise, and they did not feel that having an external moderator (a PD who may have been unfamiliar with the specialty) was a barrier to discussion. The approach required 6 hours of time for each PD and approximately $200 for dinners. CONCLUSIONS: The focus group exchange required modest resources, was perceived as safe by residents, and generated robust, actionable feedback for the programs.

Faculty Underestimate Resident Desire for Constructive Feedback and Overestimate Retaliation.

BACKGROUND: Constructive feedback from faculty to trainees is essential to promoting trainees' learning yet is rarely provided. Resident physicians want more feedback than they receive but it is unclear whether faculty know this. We explored faculty and resident impressions of constructive feedback and the barriers to giving more. We hypothesized that residents want more constructive feedback; however, faculty believe that residents do not want constructive feedback and would retaliate against faculty who give it. METHODS: Between January and March 2019, we performed a cross-sectional survey study of anesthesiology residents and teaching faculty at two large academic centers. All residents and faculty were eligible to participate. The survey assessed satisfaction with written and in-person feedback and predicted responses to specific examples, in addition to perceived barriers. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 156 residents and 260 faculty across the two institutions: 116 residents (74% response rate) and 127 faculty (49% response rate) responded. Eighty-eight percent of residents would want to receive feedback similar to the examples, whereas only 60% of faculty responded that they thought residents would want feedback. Ninety-eight percent of residents said they would not retaliate. Barriers to providing feedback included time constraints, insufficient confidence/training, fear of retaliation, and feelings of futility. CONCLUSIONS: Residents were significantly more likely to want to receive constructive feedback than the faculty members had predicted. Further, residents are unlikely to retaliate against faculty who provide feedback. Addressing barriers may help increase the amount of constructive feedback that faculty provide and resident satisfaction with feedback received.

Changing Resident Physician Studying Behaviors: A Randomized, Comparative Effectiveness Trial of Goal Setting Versus Use of WOOP.

BACKGROUND: Following through on one's goals to study is essential for effective, self-regulated learning. This can be difficult for residents because of clinical demands and limited personal time. WOOP (Wish, Outcome, Obstacle, Plan) is a self-regulation strategy, also known as mental contrasting with implementation intentions. WOOP increases follow-through on goals in many domains, although it has not, to our knowledge, been evaluated in medical education. OBJECTIVE: We compared the effect of WOOP versus goal setting on time residents spent studying. METHODS: Through a prospective, randomized, comparative effectiveness study, during a 1-month, intensive care unit rotation, we clustered anesthesiology residents in single-blind fashion to WOOP versus goal setting. Both groups received organized study materials. The intervention group performed WOOP to study more; the comparison group set goals to study more. Residents tracked studying with daily diaries. The primary outcome was total time spent studying toward stated goals. Time spent studying "non-goal" medical material was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Of 34 eligible residents, 100% participated. Sixteen residents were randomized to the WOOP group and 18 to the goal-setting group. The WOOP group spent significantly more time studying toward their goals compared with the goal-setting group (median = 4.3 hours versus 1.5 hours; P = .021; g = 0.66). There was no significant difference in time spent studying non-goal medical material between groups (median = 5.5 hours versus 5.0 hours, P = .99). CONCLUSIONS: WOOP increased the time residents spent studying toward their goals as compared with setting goals alone.

The Anesthetic Implications of Aqueous Drainage Devices and Glaucoma: A Report of a Patient Undergoing Urgent Prone Cervical Decompression and Fusion.

The pathophysiology of glaucoma and perioperative visual loss is similar. A patient with glaucoma may be at increased risk of perioperative visual loss. For both, goals of management include optimizing ocular perfusion pressure and oxygen delivery. One treatment for refractory glaucoma is an aqueous drainage device; however, there is no published literature on the anesthetic management of patients with these devices. We present the case of a patient with recalcitrant glaucoma treated with an Ahmed Glaucoma Valve who underwent urgent prone surgery. Anesthetic implications of aqueous drainage devices and glaucoma are discussed, and recommendations are made.

Changing Physician Behavior With Implementation Intentions: Closing the Gap Between Intentions and Actions.

In medical education, even well-intentioned learners struggle to change their practice. This intention-action gap is a well-described phenomenon. Strong commitment to changing behaviors is important, but by itself it is only a modest predictor of goal attainment.Implementation intentions are an extensively studied strategy from cognitive psychology that have been shown to close the intention-action gap and increase goal attainment across myriad domains. Implementation intentions are "if-then" plans that specify an anticipated future situation and a planned response-"If I encounter situation X, then I will respond with action Y." They differ from simple goals, which specify only a desired behavior or outcome-"I intend to perform action Z." Despite this subtle difference, they have shown substantial effectiveness over goals alone in increasing goal attainment.In this article, the authors first describe implementation intentions, review the substantial body of evidence demonstrating their effectiveness, and explain the underlying psychological mechanisms. They then illustrate the connections between implementation intentions and established learning theory. The final section focuses on forming effective implementation intentions in medical education. The authors provide concrete examples across the continuum of learners (from medical students to attending physicians) and competencies, and make recommendations for when and how to employ implementation intentions.