Entrustable Professional Activity-Based Summative Performance Assessment in the Surgery Clerkship.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to 1) assess the performance Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) when integrated into the summative assessment of third-year medical students on the surgery clerkship and 2) to compare EPAs to traditional clinical performance assessment tools. DESIGN: EPA assessments were collected prospectively from a minimum of 4 evaluators at the completion of each surgical clerkship rotation from November 2019 to June 2019. Overall EPA-based clinical performance scores were calculated as the sum of the mean EPA score from each evaluator. A rating of overall clinical performance called the clinical performance appraisal (CPA) was also collected. EPA ratings were compared to the CPA score, National Board of Medical Examiners exam score, objective structured clinical exam scores, and final clerkship grade. SETTING: Northwestern Memorial Hospital, a tertiary care teaching institution in Chicago, IL. RESULTS: Overall, 446 evaluations (111 students) were included in the analysis. The aggregate EPA scores ranged from 11.6-24.0 (mean 19.9 ± 2.0), and the CPA scores ranged from 4.4-9.0 (mean 7.6 ± 0.7). The variance among learners in EPA scores was significantly higher than CPA scores (p < 0.001). The aggregate EPA scores correlated well with CPA scores (Spearman's rho 0.803) but had lesser, positive correlations with the objective structured clinical exam (rho 0.153) and National Board of Medical Examiners (rho 0.265) scores. When all EPA scores were included in ordinal logistic regression, only EPA 6, oral presentation of patients, was independently associated with students' final grades (OR: 10.05, 95%CI 1.41-71.80; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Integration of EPAs for use in clinical performance assessment of medical students is feasible within a surgery clerkship. Compared to a global clinical performance assessment, EPA-based assessment provided better discrimination of clinical performance among learners. Use of EPAs may better identify advanced learners and those that need additional time.

Managing central venous access during a health care crisis.

OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, central venous access line teams were implemented at many hospitals throughout the world to provide access for critically ill patients. The objective of this study was to describe the structure, practice patterns, and outcomes of these vascular access teams during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, self-reported study of central venous access line teams in hospitals afflicted with the COVID-19 pandemic. To participate in the study, hospitals were required to meet one of the following criteria: development of a formal plan for a central venous access line team during the pandemic; implementation of a central venous access line team during the pandemic; placement of central venous access by a designated practice group during the pandemic as part of routine clinical practice; or management of an iatrogenic complication related to central venous access in a patient with COVID-19. RESULTS: Participants from 60 hospitals in 13 countries contributed data to the study. Central venous line teams were most commonly composed of vascular surgery and general surgery attending physicians and trainees. Twenty sites had 2657 lines placed by their central venous access line team or designated practice group. During that time, there were 11 (0.4%) iatrogenic complications associated with central venous access procedures performed by the line team or group at those 20 sites. Triple lumen catheters, Cordis (Santa Clara, Calif) catheters, and nontunneled hemodialysis catheters were the most common types of central venous lines placed by the teams. Eight (14%) sites reported experience in placing central venous lines in prone, ventilated patients with COVID-19. A dedicated line cart was used by 35 (59%) of the hospitals. Less than 50% (24 [41%]) of the participating sites reported managing thrombosed central lines in COVID-19 patients. Twenty-three of the sites managed 48 iatrogenic complications in patients with COVID-19 (including complications caused by providers outside of the line team or designated practice group). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a dedicated central venous access line team during a pandemic or other health care crisis is a way by which physicians trained in central venous access can contribute their expertise to a stressed health care system. A line team composed of physicians with vascular skill sets provides relief to resource-constrained intensive care unit, ward, and emergency medicine teams with a low rate of iatrogenic complications relative to historical reports. We recommend that a plan for central venous access line team implementation be in place for future health care crises.