National examination of Brazilian residents and specialization trainees in radiology and diagnostic imaging: a tool for evaluating the qualifications of future radiologists.

PURPOSE: This is a study of performance based on an In-training Examination for Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging targeting residents (R) and specialization trainees (ST) in Radiology. The radiological training may differ between R and ST in some centers. The authors present their experience and thoughts regarding the first three years of application of the In-training Examination administered by The Brazilian College of Radiology. METHODS: Three hundred and eight-six tests were analyzed in 1999, 715 in 2000, and 731 in 2001. The yearly tests consisted of multiple-choice answers, some with interpretation of digital images, and were divided into 9 specialties: neurology, thorax, physics, pediatrics, digestive system, urinary system, musculoskeletal system, mammography, and gynecology-obstetrics. Each specialty was analyzed separately. The tests were given simultaneously in 12 Brazilian cities. The subspecialty scores of examinees at different stages of training were compared (1st, 2nd, and 3rd year residents and specialization trainees), by the Kruskal-Wallis test (P<0.001). RESULTS: The 1999 examination did not reveal any significant difference between the R and ST groups (P>0.05). Generally, in 2000 and 2001, R achieved higher scores than ST (P<0.001). The performance in physics was poor for both groups for the 3 years covered by the study. CONCLUSION: The performance of residents was better than that of the specialization trainees in the majority of the subspecialties, mainly in the last two years. The In-training Examination provides a system for evaluating future specialists and identifying the centers that need to revise their teaching methods and the regional differences in radiological training.

National examination of Brazilian residents and specialization trainees in radiology and diagnostic imaging: a tool for evaluating the qualifications of future radiologists

PURPOSE: This is a study of performance based on an In-training Examination for Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging targeting residents (R) and specialization trainees (ST) in Radiology. The radiological training may differ between R and ST in some centers. The authors present their experience and thoughts regarding the first three years of application of the In-training Examination administered by The Brazilian College of Radiology. METHODS: Three hundred and eight-six tests were analyzed in 1999, 715 in 2000, and 731 in 2001. The yearly tests consisted of multiple-choice answers, some with interpretation of digital images, and were divided into 9 specialties: neurology, thorax, physics, pediatrics, digestive system, urinary system, musculoskeletal system, mammography, and gynecology-obstetrics. Each specialty was analyzed separately. The tests were given simultaneously in 12 Brazilian cities. The subspecialty scores of examinees at different stages of training were compared (1st, 2nd, and 3rd year residents and specialization trainees), by the Kruskal-Wallis test (P<0.001). RESULTS: The 1999 examination did not reveal any significant difference between the R and ST groups (P>0.05). Generally, in 2000 and 2001, R achieved higher scores than ST (P<0.001). The performance in physics was poor for both groups for the 3 years covered by the study. CONCLUSION: The performance of residents was better than that of the specialization trainees in the majority of the subspecialties, mainly in the last two years. The In-training Examination provides a system for evaluating future specialists and identifying the centers that need to revise their teaching methods and the regional differences in radiological training.

OBJETIVO: Estudo comparativo entre o desempenho dos residentes e especializandos em radiologia por meio da Prova Nacional dos Residentes e Especializandos em Radiologia e Diagnóstico por Imagem (PNRERADI), durante os três primeiros anos de sua aplicação. O ensino nos centros de formação em radiodiagnóstico pode diferir entre residentes e especializandos. MÉTODOS: Foram analisadas 386 provas em 1999, 715 em 2000 e 731 em 2001. As provas foram divididas em nove subespecialidades: neurologia, tórax, digestivo, física, pediatria, urinário, músculo-esquelético, mamografia e ginecologia-obstetrícia, cada uma delas avaliada separadamente, constando de testes de múltipla escolha, algumas com interpretação de imagens digitalizadas. As provas foram aplicadas simultaneamente em 12 cidades distribuídas no território nacional. As subespecialidades foram comparadas nos diversos níveis (residentes e especializandos de 1º, 2º e 3º anos) através do teste não-paramétrico de Kruskal-Wallis (p<0,001). RESULTADOS: Na prova de 1999 não foi observada diferença significativa entre residentes e especializandos na maioria das áreas. Em 2000 e 2001, no geral, os residentes apresentaram aproveitamento superior aos especializandos. O aproveitamento na área de física foi ruim para residentes e especializandos, durante esses três anos de aplicação da prova. CONCLUSÕES: O desempenho dos residentes em relação aos especializandos foi melhor na maioria das subespecialidades, principalmente nos dois últimos anos avaliados. A PNRERADI representa um meio de avaliação dos futuros especialistas, identificando os centros que necessitem de revisão do modelo de ensino, além de prover informação da diferença regional no treinamento da radiologia.

Adult respiratory distress syndrome in newborns: 5 cases

Aiming to set out the occurrence of the Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) in the neonatal period, and according to recent descriptions in literature, we prospectively analyzed 5 cases. The criterion adopted to characterize ARDS was the expanded defintion of the syndrome suggested by Murray & Matthay, (10), conjointly with non-invasive cardiac monitoring, to exclude pulmonary edema resulting from myocardial dysfunction. For each case, evolution was briefly described, as well as the predisposing conditions associated to the clinical score punctuation for diagnosis, stressing the importance of adequate identification and fastest possible mangement of such source of systemic effects. Upon admission at the intensive care unit (Ped. ICU), the five cases were either related to sepsis or to the syndrome of multiple organ failure, or to both syndromes were essentially triggered by severe anoxia neonatorum, respiratory distress of the newborn and/or previous hospitalization with hypoxemia and use of a higher inspired fraction of oxygen. The primary causes of death were related to uncontrolled infection or shock, and not directly related to pulmonary failure