Regional anesthesia for transplantation surgery - A White Paper Part 2: Abdominal transplantation surgery.

Transplantation surgery continues to evolve and improve through advancements in transplant technique and technology. With the increased availability of ultrasound machines as well as the continued development of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols, regional anesthesia has become an essential component of providing analgesia and minimizing opioid use perioperatively. Many centers currently utilize peripheral and neuraxial blocks during transplantation surgery, but these techniques are far from standardized practices. The utilization of these procedures is often dependent on transplantation centers' historical methods and perioperative cultures. To date, no formal guidelines or recommendations exist which address the use of regional anesthesia in transplantation surgery. In response, the Society for the Advancement of Transplant Anesthesia (SATA) identified experts in both transplantation surgery and regional anesthesia to review available literature concerning these topics. The goal of this task force was to provide an overview of these publications to help guide transplantation anesthesiologists in utilizing regional anesthesia. The literature search encompassed most transplantation surgeries currently performed and the multitude of associated regional anesthetic techniques. Outcomes analyzed included analgesic effectiveness of the blocks, reduction in other analgesic modalities-particularly opioid use, improvement in patient hemodynamics, as well as associated complications. The findings summarized in this systemic review support the use of regional anesthesia for postoperative pain control after transplantation surgeries. Part 1 of the manuscript focused on regional anesthesia performed in thoracic transplantation surgeries, and part 2 in abdominal transplantations. Specifically, regional anesthesia in liver, kidney, pancreas, intestinal, and uterus transplants or applicable surgeries are discussed.

An Exploratory Analysis of ChatGPT Compared to Human Performance With the Anesthesiology Oral Board Examination: Initial Insights and Implications.

BACKGROUND: Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT) has been tested and has passed various high-level examinations. However, it has not been tested on an examination such as the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) Standardized Oral Examination (SOE). The SOE is designed to assess higher-level competencies, such as judgment, organization, adaptability to unexpected clinical changes, and presentation of information. METHODS: Four anesthesiology fellows were examined on 2 sample ABA SOEs. Their answers were compared to those produced by the same questions asked to ChatGPT. All human and ChatGPT responses were transcribed, randomized by module, and then reproduced as complete examinations, using a commercially available software-based human voice replicator. Eight ABA applied examiners listened to and scored the topic and modules from 1 of the 4 versions of each of the 2 sample examinations. The ABA did not provide any support or collaboration with any authors. RESULTS: The anesthesiology fellow's answers were found to have a better median score than ChatGPT, for the module topics scores (P = .03). However, there was no significant difference in the median overall global module scores between the human and ChatGPT responses (P = .17). The examiners were able to identify the ChatGPT-generated answers for 23 of 24 modules (95.83%), with only 1 ChatGPT response perceived as from a human. In contrast, the examiners thought the human (fellow) responses were artificial intelligence (AI)-generated in 10 of 24 modules (41.67%). Examiner comments explained that ChatGPT generated relevant content, but were lengthy answers, which at times did not focus on the specific scenario priorities. There were no comments from the examiners regarding Chat GPT fact "hallucinations." CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT generated SOE answers with comparable module ratings to anesthesiology fellows, as graded by 8 ABA oral board examiners. However, the ChatGPT answers were deemed subjectively inferior due to the length of responses and lack of focus. Future curation and training of an AI database, like ChatGPT, could produce answers more in line with ideal ABA SOE answers. This could lead to higher performance and an anesthesiology-specific trained AI useful for training and examination preparation.

Development and Pilot Testing of a Programmatic System for Competency Assessment in US Anesthesiology Residency Training.

BACKGROUND: In 2018, a set of entrustable professional activities (EPAs) and procedural skills assessments were developed for anesthesiology training, but they did not assess all the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) milestones. The aims of this study were to (1) remap the 2018 EPA and procedural skills assessments to the revised ACGME Anesthesiology Milestones 2.0, (2) develop new assessments that combined with the original assessments to create a system of assessment that addresses all level 1 to 4 milestones, and (3) provide evidence for the validity of the assessments. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi process, a panel of anesthesiology education experts remapped the original assessments developed in 2018 to the Anesthesiology Milestones 2.0 and developed new assessments to create a system that assessed all level 1 through 4 milestones. Following a 24-month pilot at 7 institutions, the number of EPA and procedural skill assessments and mean scores were computed at the end of the academic year. Milestone achievement and subcompetency data for assessments from a single institution were compared to scores assigned by the institution's clinical competency committee (CCC). RESULTS: New assessment development, 2 months of testing and feedback, and revisions resulted in 5 new EPAs, 11 nontechnical skills assessments (NTSAs), and 6 objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs). Combined with the original 20 EPAs and procedural skills assessments, the new system of assessment addresses 99% of level 1 to 4 Anesthesiology Milestones 2.0. During the 24-month pilot, aggregate mean EPA and procedural skill scores significantly increased with year in training. System subcompetency scores correlated significantly with 15 of 23 (65.2%) corresponding CCC scores at a single institution, but 8 correlations (36.4%) were <30.0, illustrating poor correlation. CONCLUSIONS: A panel of experts developed a set of EPAs, procedural skill assessment, NTSAs, and OSCEs to form a programmatic system of assessment for anesthesiology residency training in the United States. The method used to develop and pilot test the assessments, the progression of assessment scores with time in training, and the correlation of assessment scores with CCC scoring of milestone achievement provide evidence for the validity of the assessments.

2023 Update on Vascular Anesthesia.

The authors thank the editors for this opportunity to review the recent literature on vascular surgery and anesthesia and provide this clinical update. The last in a series of updates on this topic was published in 2019.1 This review explores evolving discussions and current trends related to vascular surgery and anesthesia that have been published since then. The focus is on the major points discussed in the recent literature in the following areas: carotid artery surgery, infrarenal aortic surgery, peripheral vascular surgery, and the preoperative evaluation of vascular surgical patients.

National Delphi Survey on Anesthesiology Resident Training in Perioperative Ultrasound.

OBJECTIVE: To establish agreement among nationwide experts through a Delphi process on the key components of perioperative ultrasound and the recommended minimum number of examinations that should be performed by a resident upon graduation. DESIGN: A prospective cross-sectional study. SETTING: A survey on multiinstitutional academic medical centers. PARTICIPANTS: Anesthesiology residency program directors and/or experts in perioperative ultrasound. INTERVENTIONS: A list of components and examinations recommended for anesthesiology resident training in perioperative ultrasound was developed based on guidelines and 2 survey rounds among a steering committee of 10 experts. A questionnaire asking for a rating of each component on a 5-point Likert scale subsequently was sent to an expert panel of 120 anesthesiology residency program directors across the United States. An agreement of at least 70% of participants, rating a component as 4 or 5, was compulsory to list a component as essential for anesthesiology resident training in perioperative ultrasound. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The nationwide survey's response rate was 62.5%, and agreement was reached after 2 Delphi rounds. The final list included 44 essential components for basic ultrasound physics and knobology, cardiac ultrasound, lung ultrasound, and ultrasound-guided vascular access. Agreement was not reached for abdominal ultrasound, gastric ultrasound, and ultrasound-guided airway assessment. Agreement for the recommended minimum number of examinations that should be performed by a resident upon graduation included 50 each for transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography, and 20 each for lung ultrasound, ultrasound-guided central line, and ultrasound-guided arterial line placements. CONCLUSIONS: The recommendations outlined in this survey can be used to establish standardized training for perioperative ultrasound by anesthesiology residency programs.

Utilizing multimodal analgesia to evaluate postoperative analgesic requirements in kidney transplant recipients.

The use of non-opioid analgesics following surgery has proven beneficial in managing pain and decreasing adverse outcomes following surgery. Data assessing outcomes related to opioid use is limited in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). We evaluated the effectiveness of implementing a reduced to no opioid use protocol in KTRs. This retrospective cohort study included adult KTRs between January 2017 and July 2019 with a multimodal analgesic protocol (MAP), focused on limiting opioids, implemented in August 2018. We compared analgesic requirements in morphine milligram equivalents (MME) during transplant admissions between the MAP cohort and traditional cohort. There were 217 KTRs who met the criteria. Inpatient opioid use was significantly reduced in the MAP cohort (16.5 ± 19.2 MME/day vs 24.7 ± 19.7 MME/day; P <.05) with no significant difference in pain scores. No use of opioids within six months of discharge was significantly increased in the MAP cohort (50% vs 7%; P <.001), and there were no reported deaths at six months in either cohort. The use of multimodal analgesia is beneficial in KTRs to provide adequate pain control with limited to no exposure of opioids during admission or at discharge.

Educating Anesthesiologists During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic and Beyond.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has altered approaches to anesthesiology education by shifting educational paradigms. This vision article discusses pre-COVID-19 educational methodologies and best evidence, adaptations required under COVID-19, and evidence for these modifications, and suggests future directions for anesthesiology education. Learning management systems provide structure to online learning. They have been increasingly utilized to improve access to didactic materials asynchronously. Despite some historic reservations, the pandemic has necessitated a rapid uptake across programs. Commercially available systems offer a wide range of peer-reviewed curricular options. The flipped classroom promotes learning foundational knowledge before teaching sessions with a focus on application during structured didactics. There is growing evidence that this approach is preferred by learners and may increase knowledge gain. The flipped classroom works well with learning management systems to disseminate focused preclass work. Care must be taken to keep virtual sessions interactive. Simulation, already used in anesthesiology, has been critical in preparation for the care of COVID-19 patients. Multidisciplinary, in situ simulations allow for rapid dissemination of new team workflows. Physical distancing and reduced availability of providers have required more sessions. Early pandemic decreases in operating volumes have allowed for this; future planning will have to incorporate smaller groups, sanitizing of equipment, and attention to use of personal protective equipment. Effective technical skills training requires instruction to mastery levels, use of deliberate practice, and high-quality feedback. Reduced sizes of skill-training workshops and approaches for feedback that are not in-person will be required. Mock oral and objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) allow for training and assessment of competencies often not addressed otherwise. They provide formative and summative data and objective measurements of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) milestones. They also allow for preparation for the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) APPLIED examination. Adaptations to teleconferencing or videoconferencing can allow for continued use. Benefits of teaching in this new era include enhanced availability of asynchronous learning and opportunities to apply universal, expert-driven curricula. Burdens include decreased social interactions and potential need for an increased amount of smaller, live sessions. Acquiring learning management systems and holding more frequent simulation and skills sessions with fewer learners may increase cost. With the increasing dependency on multimedia and technology support for teaching and learning, one important focus of educational research is on the development and evaluation of strategies that reduce extraneous processing and manage essential and generative processing in virtual learning environments. Collaboration to identify and implement best practices has the potential to improve education for all learners.

Construct Validation of the American Board of Anesthesiology's APPLIED Examination for Initial Certification.

BACKGROUND: The American Board of Anesthesiology administers the APPLIED Examination as a part of initial certification, which as of 2018 includes 2 components-the Standardized Oral Examination (SOE) and the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). The goal of this study is to investigate the measurement construct(s) of the APPLIED Examination to assess whether the SOE and the OSCE measure distinct constructs (ie, factors). METHODS: Exploratory item factor analysis of candidates' performance ratings was used to determine the number of constructs, and confirmatory item factor analysis to estimate factor loadings within each construct and correlation(s) between the constructs. RESULTS: In exploratory item factor analysis, the log-likelihood ratio test and Akaike information criterion index favored the 3-factor model, with factors reflecting the SOE, OSCE Communication and Professionalism, and OSCE Technical Skills. The Bayesian information criterion index favored the 2-factor model, with factors reflecting the SOE and the OSCE. In confirmatory item factor analysis, both models suggest moderate correlation between the SOE factor and the OSCE factor; the correlation was 0.49 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.55) for the 3-factor model and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.54-0.64) for the 2-factor model. The factor loadings were lower for Technical Skills stations of the OSCE (ranging from 0.11 to 0.25) compared with those of the SOE and Communication and Professionalism stations of the OSCE (ranging from 0.36 to 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: The analyses provide evidence that the SOE and the OSCE measure distinct constructs, supporting the rationale for administering both components of the APPLIED Examination for initial certification in anesthesiology.

Development of an Objective Structured Clinical Examination as a Component of Assessment for Initial Board Certification in Anesthesiology.

With its first administration of an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) in 2018, the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) became the first US medical specialty certifying board to incorporate this type of assessment into its high-stakes certification examination system. The fundamental rationale for the ABA's introduction of the OSCE is to include an assessment that allows candidates for board certification to demonstrate what they actually "do" in domains relevant to clinical practice. Inherent in this rationale is that the OSCE will capture competencies not well assessed in the current written and oral examinations-competencies that will allow the ABA to judge whether a candidate meets the standards expected for board certification more properly. This special article describes the ABA's journey from initial conceptualization through first administration of the OSCE, including the format of the OSCE, the process for scenario development, the standardized patient program that supports OSCE administration, examiner training, scoring, and future assessment of reliability, validity, and impact of the OSCE. This information will be beneficial to both those involved in the initial certification process, such as residency graduate candidates and program directors, and others contemplating the use of high-stakes summative OSCE assessments.

First-Year Results of the American Board of Anesthesiology's Objective Structured Clinical Examination for Initial Certification.

In 2018, the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) became the first US medical specialty certifying board to incorporate an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) into its initial certification examination system. Previously, the ABA's staged examination system consisted of 2 written examinations (the BASIC and ADVANCED examinations) and the Standardized Oral Examination (SOE). The OSCE and the existing SOE are now 2 separate components of the APPLIED Examination. This report presents the results of the first-year OSCE administration. A total of 1410 candidates took both the OSCE and the SOE in 2018. Candidate performance approximated a normal distribution for both the OSCE and the SOE, and was not associated with the timing of the examination, including day of the week, morning versus afternoon session, and order of the OSCE and the SOE. Practice-based Learning and Improvement was the most difficult station, while Application of Ultrasonography was the least difficult. The correlation coefficient between SOE and OSCE scores was 0.35 ([95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.30-0.39]; P < .001). Scores for the written ADVANCED Examination were modestly correlated with scores for the SOE (r = 0.29 [95% CI, 0.25-0.34]; P < .001) and the OSCE (r = 0.15 [95% CI, 0.10-0.20]; P < .001). Most of the candidates who failed the SOE passed the OSCE, and most of the candidates who failed the OSCE passed the SOE. Of the 1410 candidates, 77 (5.5%) failed the OSCE, 155 (11.0%) failed the SOE, and 25 (1.8%) failed both. Thus, 207 (14.7%) failed at least 1 component of the APPLIED Examination. Adding an OSCE to a board certification examination system is feasible. Preliminary evidence indicates that the OSCE measures aspects of candidate abilities distinct from those measured by other examinations used for initial board certification.

Learners and Luddites in the Twenty-first Century: Bringing Evidence-based Education to Anesthesiology.

Anesthesiologists are both teachers and learners and alternate between these roles throughout their careers. However, few anesthesiologists have formal training in the methodologies and theories of education. Many anesthesiology educators often teach as they were taught and may not be taking advantage of current evidence in education to guide and optimize the way they teach and learn. This review describes the most up-to-date evidence in education for teaching knowledge, procedural skills, and professionalism. Methods such as active learning, spaced learning, interleaving, retrieval practice, e-learning, experiential learning, and the use of cognitive aids will be described. We made an effort to illustrate the best available evidence supporting educational practices while recognizing the inherent challenges in medical education research. Similar to implementing evidence in clinical practice in an attempt to improve patient outcomes, implementing an evidence-based approach to anesthesiology education may improve learning outcomes.

Predictors of Admission After the Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Pathway for Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways in gynecologic surgery have been shown to decrease length of stay with no impact on readmission, but no study has assessed predictors of admission in this population. The purpose of this study was to identify predictors of admission after laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) and robotic-assisted hysterectomy (RAH) performed under an ERAS pathway. METHODS: This is a prospective observational study of women undergoing LH/RAH for benign indications within an ERAS pathway. Data collected included same-day discharge, reason for admission, incidences of urgent clinic and emergency room (ER) visits, readmissions, reoperations, and 9 postulated predictors of admission listed below. Patient demographics, markers of baseline health, and clinical outcomes were compared between groups (ERAS patients discharged on the day of surgery versus admitted) using Fisher exact and Student t tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the potential risk factors for being admitted, adjusting for age, race, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status score, preoperative diagnosis indicative of hysterectomy, preoperative chronic pain, completion of a preprocedure pain-coping skills counseling session, procedure time, and compliance to the ERAS pathway. RESULTS: There were 165 patients undergoing LH/RAH within an ERAS pathway; 93 (56%) were discharged on the day of surgery and 72 were admitted. There were no significant differences in ER visits, readmissions, and reoperations between groups (ER visits: discharged 13% versus admitted 13%, P = .99; 90-day readmission: discharged 4% versus admitted 7%, P = .51; and 90-day reoperation: discharged 4% versus admitted 3%, P = .70). The most common reasons for admission were postoperative urinary retention (n = 21, 30%), inadequate pain control (n = 21, 30%), postoperative nausea and vomiting (n = 7, 10%), and planned admissions (n = 7, 10%). Increased ASA physical status, being African American, and increased length of procedure were significantly associated with an increased risk of admission (ASA physical status III versus ASA physical status I or II: odds ratio [OR], 3.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36-7.16; P = .007; African American: OR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.02-5.96; P = .04; and length of procedure, assessed in 30-minute increments: OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.02-1.50; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: We were able to define predictors of admission for patients having LH/RAH managed with an ERAS pathway. Increased ASA physical status, being African American, and increased length of procedure were significantly associated with admission after LH/RAH performed under an ERAS pathway. In addition, the incidences of urgent clinic and ER visits, readmissions, and reoperations within 90 days of surgery were similar for patients who were discharged on the day of surgery compared to those admitted.

Defining Value-Based Care in Cardiac and Vascular Anesthesiology: The Past, Present, and Future of Perioperative Cardiovascular Care.

Health care reimbursement models are transitioning from volume-based to value-based models. Value-based models focus on patient outcomes both during the hospital admission and postdischarge. These models place emphasis on cost, quality of care, and coordination of multidisciplinary services. Perioperative physicians are challenged to evaluate traditional practices to ensure coordinated, cost-effective, and evidence-based care. With the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services planned introduction of bundled payments for coronary artery bypass graft surgery, cardiovascular anesthesiologists are financially responsible for postdischarge outcomes. In order to meet these patient outcomes, multidisciplinary care pathways must be designed, implemented, and sustained, a process that is challenging at best. This review (1) provides a historical perspective of health care reimbursement; (2) defines value as it pertains to quality, service, and cost; (3) reviews the history of value-based care for cardiac surgery; (4) describes the drive toward optimization for vascular surgery patients; and (5) discusses how programs like Enhanced Recovery After Surgery assist with the delivery of value-based care.

A Descriptive Survey of Anesthesiology Residency Simulation Programs: How Are Programs Preparing Residents for the New American Board of Anesthesiology APPLIED Certification Examination?

BACKGROUND: Anesthesiology residency programs may need new simulation-based programs to prepare residents for the new Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) component of the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) Primary Certification process. The design of such programs may require significant resources, including faculty time, expertise, and funding, as are currently needed for structured oral examination (SOE) preparation. This survey analyzed the current state of US-based anesthesiology residency programs regarding simulation-based educational programming for SOE and OSCE preparation. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to every anesthesiology residency program director in the United States. The survey included 15 to 46 questions, depending on each respondent's answers. The survey queried current practices and future plans regarding resident preparation specifically for the ABA APPLIED examination, with emphasis on the OSCE. Descriptive statistics were summarized. χ and Fisher exact tests were used to test the differences in proportions across groups. Spearman rank correlation was used to examine the association between ordinal variables. RESULTS: The responding 66 programs (49%) were a representative sample of all anesthesiology residencies (N = 136) in terms of geographical location (χ P = .58). There was a low response rate from small programs that have 12 or fewer clinical anesthesia residents. Ninety-one percent (95% confidence interval [CI], 84%-95%) of responders agreed that it is the responsibility of the program to specifically prepare residents for primary certification, and most agreed that it is important to practice SOEs (94%; 95% CI, 88%-97%) and OSCEs (89%; 95% CI, 83%-94%). While 100% of respondents reported providing mock SOEs, only 31% (95% CI, 24%-40%) of respondents provided mock OSCE experiences. Of those without an OSCE program, 75% (95% CI, 64%-83%) reported plans to start one. The most common reasons for not having an OSCE program already in place, and the perceived challenges for implementing an OSCE program, were the same: lack of time (faculty and residents), expertise in OSCE development and assessment, and funding. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide data from residency programs for benchmarking their simulation curriculum and ABA APPLIED Examination preparation offerings. Despite agreement that residency programs should prepare residents for the ABA APPLIED Examination, many programs have yet to implement an OSCE preparation program, in part due to lack of financial resources, faculty expertise, and time. Additionally, in contrast to the SOE, the OSCE is a new format for ABA primary certification. As a result, the lack of consensus concerning preparation needs could be related to the amount information that is available regarding the examination content and assessment process.

Review of crisis resource management (CRM) principles in the setting of intraoperative malignant hyperthermia.

The practice of medicine is characterized by routine and typical cases whose management usually goes according to plan. However, the occasional case does arise which involves rare catastrophic emergencies, such as intraoperative malignant hyperthermia (MH), which require a comprehensive, coordinated, and resource-intensive treatment plan. Physicians are expected to provide expert quality care for routine, typical cases, but is it reasonable to expect the same standard of expertise and comprehensive management when the emergency involves a rare entity? Although physicians would like to say yes to this question, the reality is that no physician will ever amass the amount of experience in patient care needed to truly qualify as an expert in the management of a rare emergency entity, such as MH. However, physicians can become expert in the global process of managing emergencies by using the principles of crisis resource management (CRM). In this article, we review the key concepts of CRM, using a real life example of a team who utilized CRM principles to successfully manage an intraoperative MH crisis, despite there being no one on the team who had ever previously encountered a true MH crisis.

Acquire, Curate, Diversify: Staying Current With Key Medical Education Literature.

Rapid technological advancement has led to increasingly convenient and affordable access to academic publications while also contributing to information overload.We recommend the following strategies for clinicians and researchers to effectively stay current with themedical education literaturemost applicable to their areas of focus. 1,2.

No Miracles in Two Minutes: A Randomized Controlled Study on the Impact of Preparatory Expansive Posing on Anesthesiology Residents' Performance in Mock Structured Oral Examinations.

Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of engaging in preparatory expansive posing on the performance of anesthesiology trainees during a mock structured oral examination. Methods: A total of 38 clinical residents at a single institution participated in this prospective randomized controlled study. Participants were stratified by clinical anesthesia year and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 orientation rooms to prepare for the examination. The preparatory expansive posing participants stood for 2 minutes with their hands and arms above their heads and with their feet approximately 1 ft apart. Conversely, the control participants sat quietly in a chair for 2 minutes. All participants then received the same orientation and examination. Faculty evaluation of resident performance, residents' self-assessment of performance, and anxiety score were collected. Results: There was no evidence to support our primary hypothesis that residents who engaged in preparatory expansive posing for 2 minutes prior to a mock structured oral examination would score higher than their control counterparts (P = .68). There was no evidence to support our secondary hypotheses that preparatory expansive posing increases self-assessment of one's performance (P = .31) or reduces perceived anxiety during a mock structured oral examination (P = .85). Conclusions: Preparatory expansive posing did not improve anesthesiology residents' mock structured oral examination performance or self-assessment of their performance, nor did it reduce their perceived anxiety. Preparatory expansive posing is likely not a useful technique in improving the performance of residents in structured oral examinations.