Online vs in-person musculoskeletal ultrasound course: a cohort comparison study.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care musculoskeletal (MSK) ultrasound (US) courses are typically held in-person. The COVID-19 pandemic guidelines forced courses to switch to online delivery. To determine this impact, we conducted an observational cohort study, comparing homework completion and image quality between an Online and a historical In-person cohort. METHODS: The In-person (n = 27) and Online (n = 24) cohorts attended two learning sessions spaced six months apart. The course content was the same, while the process of delivery differed. As homework, participants submitted US images biweekly for up to five months after each session. Expert faculty provided written feedback to all participants, and two independent reviewers rated the image quality for a subset of participants in each group who had completed at least 70% of their homework (In-person, n = 9; Online, n = 9). Participants self-reported their satisfaction through post-course evaluation. RESULTS: 63% of In-Person and 71% of Online cohort participants submitted their homework images. We observed no differences in the mean amount of homework images submitted for In-person (M = 37.3%, SD = 42.6%) and Online cohorts (M = 48.1%, SD = 38.8%; p > 0.05, Mann-Whitney U Test). At course end, the cohorts did not differ in overall image quality (p > 0.05, Wilcoxon Signed-rank Test). All participants reported high levels of satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: A convenience sample of participants attending a basic MSK US course in-person and online did not differ statistically in homework completion, quality of submitted US images, or course satisfaction. We add to literature suggesting online learning remains a viable option post-pandemic.

Dual purposes by design: exploring alignment between residents' and academic advisors' documents in a longitudinal program.

Longitudinal academic advising (AA) and coaching programs are increasingly implemented in competency based medical education (CBME) to help residents reflect and act on the voluminous assessment data they receive. Documents created by residents for purposes of reflection are often used for a second, summative purpose-to help competence committees make decisions-which may be problematic. Using inductive, thematic analysis we analyzed written comments generated by 21 resident-AA dyads in one large internal medicine program who met over a 2 year period to determine what residents write when asked to reflect, how this aligns with what the AAs report, and what changes occur over time (total 109 resident self-reflections and 105 AA reports). Residents commented more on their developing autonomy, progress and improvement than AAs, who commented far more on performance measures. Over time, residents' writing shifted away from intrinsic roles, patient care and improvement towards what AAs focused on, including getting EPAs (entrustable professional activities), studying and exams. For EPAs, the emphasis was on getting sufficient numbers rather than reflecting on what residents were learning. Our findings challenge the practice of dual-purposing documents, by questioning the blurring of formative and summative intent, the structure of forms and their multiple conflicting purposes, and assumptions about the advising relationship over time. Our study suggests a need to re-evaluate how reflective documents are used in CBME programs. Further research should explore whether and how documentation can best be used to support resident growth and development.

Potentially avoidable admissions to general internal medicine at an academic teaching hospital: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Identifying potentially avoidable admissions to Canadian hospitals is an important health system goal. With general internal medicine (GIM) accounting for 40% of hospital admissions, we sought to develop a method to identify potentially avoidable admissions and characterize patient, provider and health system factors. METHODS: We conducted an observational study of GIM admissions at our institution from August 2019 to February 2020. We defined potentially avoidable admissions as admissions that could be managed in an appropriate and safe manner in the emergency department or ambulatory setting and asked staff physicians to screen admissions daily and flag candidates as potentially avoidable admissions. For each candidate, we prepared a case review and debriefed with members of the admitting team. We then reviewed each candidate with our research team, assigned an avoidability score (1 [low] to 4 [high]) and identified contributing factors for those with scores of 3 or more. RESULTS: We screened 601 total admissions and staff physicians flagged 117 (19.5%) of these as candidate potential avoidable admissions. Consensus review identified 67 candidates as potentially avoidable admissions (11.1%, 95% confidence interval 8.8%-13.9%); these patients were younger (mean age 65 yr v. 72 yr), had fewer comorbidities (Canadian Institute for Health Information Case Mix Group+ 0.42 v. 1.14), had lower resource-intensity weighting scores (0.72 v. 1.50) and shorter hospital lengths of stay (29 h v. 105 h) (p < 0.01). Common factors included diagnostic and therapeutic uncertainty, perceived need for short-term monitoring, government directive of a 4-hour limit for admission decision-making and subspecialist request to admit. INTERPRETATION: Our prospective method of screening, flagging and case review showed that 1 in 9 GIM admissions were potentially avoidable. Other institutions could consider adapting this methodology to ascertain their rate of potentially avoidable admissions and to understand contributing factors to inform improvement endeavours.

Effect of Ward-Based High-Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) Oxygen Therapy on Critical Care Utilization During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hospitals expanded critical care capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic by treating COVID-19 patients with high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) in non-traditional settings, including general internal medicine (GIM) wards. The impact of this practice on intensive care unit (ICU) capacity is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To describe how our hospital operationalized the use of HFNC on GIM wards, assess its impact on ICU capacity, and examine the characteristics and outcomes of treated patients. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of all patients treated with HFNC on GIM wards at a Canadian tertiary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: All patients admitted with COVID-19 and treated with HFNC on GIM wards from December 28, 2020, to June 13, 2021, were included. MAIN MEASURES: We combined administrative data on critical care occupancy daily with chart-abstracted data for included patients to establish the total number of patients receiving ICU-level care at our hospital per day. We also collected data on demographics, medical comorbidities, illness severity, COVID-19 treatments, HFNC care processes, and patient outcomes. KEY RESULTS: We treated 124 patients with HFNC on the GIM wards (median age 66 years; 48% female). Patients were treated with HFNC for a median of 5 days (IQR 3 to 8); collectively, they received HFNC for a total of 740 hospital days, 71% of which were on GIM wards. At peak ICU capacity strain (144%), delivering HFNC on GIM wards added 20% to overall ICU capacity by managing up to 14 patients per day. Patients required a median maximal fraction of inspired oxygen of 80% (IQR 60 to 95). There were 18 deaths (15%) and 85 patients (69%) required critical care admission; of those, 40 (47%) required mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: With appropriate training and resources, treatment of COVID-19 patients with HFNC on GIM wards appears to be a feasible strategy to increase critical care capacity.

Necessary but Insufficient and Possibly Counterproductive: The Complex Problem of Teaching Evaluations.

The evaluation of clinical teachers' performance has long been a subject of research and debate, yet teaching evaluations (TEs) by students remain problematic. Despite their intuitive appeal, there is little evidence that TEs are associated with students' learning in the classroom or clinical setting. TEs are also subject to many forms of bias and are confounded by construct-irrelevant factors, such as the teacher's physical attractiveness or personality. Yet they are used almost exclusively as evaluations of and feedback to teachers. In this commentary, the authors review the literature on what TEs are meant to do, what they actually do in the real world, and their overall impact. The authors also consider productive ways forward. While TEs are certainly necessary to provide the crucial student voice, they are insufficient as the sole way to assess teachers. Further, they are often counterproductive. TEs carry so much weight for faculty that they can act as a disincentive for teachers to challenge learners and provide them with the critical feedback they often need, lest students give them poor ratings. To address these challenges, changes are needed, including embedding TEs in a programmatic assessment framework. For example, TEs might be used for formative feedback only, while other sources of data, such as peer assessments, learning outcomes, 360-degree feedback, and teacher reflections, could be collated into a portfolio to provide a more meaningful evaluation for teachers. Robust, transparent systems should be in place that dictate how TE data are used and to ensure they are not misused. Clinical teachers who do not "fail to fail" learners but instead take the time and effort to identify and support learners in difficulty should be recognized and rewarded. Learners need this support to succeed and the obligation to protect patients demands it.

Using Virtual Care to Facilitate Direct Hospital Admissions in Outpatients with Worsening COVID-19 Infection.

Recognizing emergency department overcrowding during the COVID-19 pandemic, a pathway to facilitate direct admissions for outpatients with worsening COVID-19 infection was created using the COVID-19 expansion to outpatients (COVIDEO) virtual care program. Outpatients appropriate for direct admission had oxygen saturations consistently <92% without severe respiratory distress. Pulse oximeters were proactively delivered to high-risk patients, and patients contacted the program in the event of worsening symptoms or desaturation persistently <92%. Over a 15-month period, 9,116 outpatients were managed by the program, 164 of whom were hospitalized, and 83 of those hospitalized (50.6%) were directly admitted through this pathway. Of those directly admitted, 10 (12.0%) patients required ICU admission, occurring a median of 4 days from hospital admission. The mortality rate among directly admitted patients was 3.6% (3/83). Implementation of a virtual care program to facilitate direct admissions in outpatients with COVID-19 created a safe, efficient, and patient-centered pathway of care.

Understanding the Influence of the Junior Attending Role on Transition to Practice: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: The Junior Attending (JA) role is an educational model, commonly implemented in the final years of training, wherein a very senior resident assumes the responsibilities of an attending physician under supervision. However, there is heterogeneity in the model's structure, and data are lacking on how it facilitates transition to independent practice. OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to determine the value of the JA role and factors that enabled a successful experience. METHODS: The authors performed a collective case study informed by a constructivist grounded theory analytical approach. Twenty semi-structured interviews from 2017 to 2020 were conducted across 2 cases: (1) Most Responsible Physician JA role (general internal medicine), and (2) Consultant JA role (infectious diseases and rheumatology). Participants included recent graduates who experienced the JA role, supervising attendings, and resident and faculty physicians who had not experienced or supervised the role. RESULTS: Experiencing the JA role builds resident confidence and may support the transition to independent practice, mainly in non-medical expert domains, as well as comfort in dealing with clinical uncertainty. The relationship between the supervising attending and the JA is an essential success factor, with more productive experiences reported when there is an establishment of clear goals and role definition that preserves the autonomy of the JA and legitimizes the JA's status as a team leader. CONCLUSIONS: The JA model offers promise in supporting the transition to independent practice when key success factors are present.

Beyond the ratings: gender effects in written comments from clinical teaching assessments.

Assessment of clinical teachers by learners is problematic. Construct-irrelevant factors influence ratings, and women teachers often receive lower ratings than men. However, most studies focus only on numeric scores. Therefore, the authors analyzed written comments on 4032 teacher assessments, representing 282 women and 448 men teachers in one Department of Medicine, to explore for gender differences. NVivo was used to search for 61 evidence- and theoretically-based terms purported to reflect teaching excellence, which were analyzed using 2 × 2 chi-squared tests. The Linguistic Index and Word Count (LIWC) was used to categorize comment data, which were analyzed using linear regressions. The only significant difference in NVivo was that men were more likely than women to have the word "available" in a comment (OR 1.4, p < .05). A subset of LIWC variables showed significant gender differences, but all effects were modest. Men teachers had more positive emotion words written about them, while negative emotion words appeared equally. Significant differences occurred more often between the men and women residents who wrote the comments, rather than those attributed to the gender of the teachers. For example, women residents used more social and gender-related words (ß 1.87, p < 0.001) and fewer words related to power or achievement (ß -3.78, p < 0.001) than men residents. Profound gender differences were not found in teacher assessment comments in this large, diverse academic department of medicine, which differs from other studies. The authors explore possible reasons including differences in departmental culture and issues related to the methods used.

Feedback from health professionals in postgraduate medical education: Influence of interprofessional relationship, identity and power.

INTRODUCTION: Capitalising on direct workplace observations of residents by interprofessional team members might be an effective strategy to promote formative feedback in postgraduate medical education. To better understand how interprofessional feedback is conceived, delivered, received and used, we explored both feedback provider and receiver perceptions of workplace feedback. METHODS: We conducted 17 individual interviews with residents and eight focus groups with health professionals (HPs) (two nurses, two rehabilitation therapists, two pharmacists and two social workers), for a total of 61 participants. Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, data collection and analysis proceeded as an iterative process using constant comparison to identify and explore themes. RESULTS: Conceptualisations and content of feedback were dependent on whether the resident was perceived as a learner or a peer within the interprofessional relationship. Residents relied on interprofessional role understanding to determine how physician competencies align with HP roles. The perceived alignment was unique to each profession and influenced feedback credibility judgements. Residents prioritised feedback from physicians or within the Medical Expertise domain-a role that HPs felt was over-valued. Despite ideal opportunities for direct observation, operational enactment of feedback was influenced by power differentials between the professions. DISCUSSION: Our results illuminate HPs' conceptualisation of feedback for residents and the social constructs influencing how their feedback is disseminated. Professional identity and social categorisation added complexity to feedback acceptance and incorporation. To ensure that interprofessional feedback can achieve desired outcomes, education programmes should implement strategies to help mitigate intergroup bias and power imbalance.

Assumptions About Competency-Based Medical Education and the State of the Underlying Evidence: A Critical Narrative Review.

PURPOSE: As educators have implemented competency-based medical education (CBME) as a framework for training and assessment, they have made decisions based on available evidence and on the medical education community's assumptions about CBME. This critical narrative review aimed to collect, synthesize, and judge the existing evidence underpinning assumptions the community has made about CBME. METHOD: The authors searched Ovid MEDLINE to identify empirical studies published January 2000 to February 2019 reporting on competence, competency, and CBME. The knowledge synthesis focused on "core" assumptions about CBME, selected via a survey of stakeholders who judged 31 previously identified assumptions. The authors judged, independently and in pairs, whether evidence from included studies supported, did not support, or was mixed related to each of the core assumptions. Assumptions were also analyzed to categorize their shared or contrasting purposes and foci. RESULTS: From 8,086 unique articles, the authors reviewed 709 full-text articles and included 189 studies reporting evidence related to 15 core assumptions. Most studies (80%; n = 152) used a quantitative design. Many focused on procedural skills (48%; n = 90) and assessed behavior in clinical settings (37%; n = 69). On aggregate, the studies produced a mixed evidence base, reporting 362 data points related to the core assumptions (169 supportive, 138 not supportive, and 55 mixed). The 31 assumptions were organized into 3 categories: aspirations, conceptualizations, and assessment practices. CONCLUSIONS: The reviewed evidence base is significant but mixed, with limited diversity in research designs and the types of competencies studied. This review pinpoints tensions to resolve (where evidence is mixed) and research questions to ask (where evidence is absent). The findings will help the community make explicit its assumptions about CBME, consider the value of those assumptions, and generate timely research questions to produce evidence about how and why CBME functions (or not).

Gender Effects in Assessment of Clinical Teaching: Does Concordance Matter?

BACKGROUND: Gender bias is thought to exist in the assessment of clinical teachers, yet its extent in different specialties is not well-documented nor has it been studied at the individual-dyadic level. OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to determine whether gender bias exists in residents' assessments of faculty teaching in 3 clinical departments, and if present, whether this is influenced by gender concordance or discordance between the faculty and resident. METHODS: Residents' ratings of faculty in internal medicine (800 faculty, 5753 ratings), surgery (377, 2249), and family medicine (672, 3438) at the University of Toronto from 2016-2017 were analyzed using the overall global rating on a 5-point scale. A mixed-effects linear regression analysis accounted for nesting of ratings within each faculty member. RESULTS: Overall scores of teaching effectiveness showed a strong skew to favorable ratings for all faculty and a ceiling effect. However, gender effects differed across departments. In internal medicine (38.5% female faculty), no significant gender effects were detected. In surgery (16.2% female) and family medicine (53.0% female), male faculty received significantly higher scores than female faculty. In surgery this was driven by male residents giving male faculty higher ratings (4.46 vs 4.26, P < .001). In family medicine this was driven by male faculty receiving higher ratings regardless of resident gender (4.65 to 4.57, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Although effects were very small and inconsistent, with gender concordance mattering only for one department, it suggests that gender is a meaningful source of variance in teaching assessments.

Tensions in Assessment: The Realities of Entrustment in Internal Medicine.

PURPOSE: A key unit of assessment in competency-based medical education (CBME) is the entrustable professional activity. The variations in how entrustment is perceived and enacted across specialties are not well understood. This study aimed to develop a thorough understanding of the process, concept, and language of entrustment as it pertains to internal medicine (IM). METHOD: Attending supervisors of IM trainees on the clinical teaching unit were purposively sampled. Sixteen semistructured interviews were conducted and analyzed using constructivist grounded theory. The study was conducted at the University of Toronto from January to September 2018. RESULTS: Five major themes were elucidated. First, the concepts of entrustment, trust, and competence are not easily distinguished and sometimes conflated. Second, entrustment decisions are not made by attendings, but rather are often automatic and predetermined by program or trainee level. Third, entrustment is not a discrete, point-in-time assessment due to longitudinality of tasks and supervisor relationships with trainees. Fourth, entrustment scale language does not reflect attendings' decision making. Fifth, entrustment decisions affect the attending more than the resident. CONCLUSIONS: A tension arises between the need for a common language of CBME and the need for authentic representation of supervision within each specialty. With new assessment instruments required to operationalize the tenets of CBME, it becomes critically important to understand the nuanced and specialty-specific language of entrustment to ensure validity of assessments.

Choosing Words Wisely: Residents' Use of Rhetorical Appeals in Conversations About Unnecessary Tests.

PURPOSE: To characterize how residents employ rhetorical appeals (i.e., the strategic use of communication to achieve specifiable goals) when discussing unnecessary diagnostic tests with patients. METHOD: In 2015, senior hematology residents from 10 Canadian universities participating in a national formative objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) completed a resource stewardship communication station. In this communication scenario, a standardized patient (SP) portrayed a patient requesting unnecessary thrombophilia testing following early pregnancy loss. The authors performed a thematic analysis of audio transcripts using a qualitative description approach to identify residents' rhetorical appeals to logic (rational appeals), credibility, and emotion. RESULTS: For persuasive communication, residents (n = 27) relied primarily on rational appeals that fit into 3 categories (with themes) focused on medical evidence (poor utility, professional guidelines and recommendations), avoidance of harm (insurance implications, unnecessary or potentially harmful interventions, patient anxiety), and reassurance to patient (normalizing, clinical pretest probability, criteria for reconsidering testing). Appeals to credibility and emotion were rarely used. CONCLUSIONS: In an OSCE setting, residents relied predominantly on rational appeals when engaging SPs in conversations about unnecessary tests. These observations yield insights into how recent emphasis within residency education on appropriate test utilization may manifest when residents put recommendations into practice in conversations with patients. This study's framework of rational appeals may be helpful in designing communication curricula about unnecessary testing. Future studies should explore rhetoric about unnecessary testing in the clinical environment, strategies to teach and coach residents leading these conversations, and patients' preferences and responses to different appeals.

Contextualizing Work-Based Assessments of Faculty and Residents: Is There a Relationship Between the Clinical Practice Environment and Assessments of Learners and Teachers?

PURPOSE: Competence is bound to context, yet seldom is environment explicitly considered in work-based assessments. This study explored faculty and residents' perspectives of the environment during internal medicine clinical teaching unit (CTU) rotations, the extent that each group accounts for environmental factors in assessments, and relationships between environmental factors and assessments. METHOD: From July 2014 to June 2015, 212 residents and 54 faculty across 5 teaching hospitals at University of Toronto rated their CTU environment using a novel Practice Environment Rating Scale (PERS) matched by block and hospital. Faculty-PERS data were paired to In-Training Evaluation Reports (ITERs) of residents supervised during each block, and Resident-PERS data to Resident Assessment of Teaching Effectiveness (RATE) scores of the same faculty. Differences between perceptions and assessments were tested using repeated-measures MANOVAs, ANOVAs, and correlations. RESULTS: One-hundred sixty-four residents completed the PERS; residents rated the CTU environment more positively than faculty (3.91/5 vs. 3.29, P < .001). Residents were less likely to report considering environmental factors when assessing faculty (2.70/5) compared with faculty assessing residents (3.40, P < .0001), d = 1.2. Whereas Faculty-PERS ratings did not correlate with ITER scores, Resident-PERS ratings had weak to moderate correlations with RATE scores (overall r = 0.27, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Residents' perceptions of the environment had small but significant correlations with assessments of faculty. Faculty's perceptions did not affect assessments of residents, potentially because they reported accounting for environmental factors. Understanding the interplay between environment and assessment is essential to developing valid competency judgments.

Moving beyond orientations: a multiple case study of the residency experiences of Canadian-born and immigrant international medical graduates.

Many international medical graduates (IMGs) enter North American residency programs every year. The Canadian IMG physician pool increasingly includes Canadian-born IMGs (C-IMGs) along with Immigrant-IMGs (I-IMGs). Similar trends exist in the United States. Our objective was to understand the similarities and differences in the challenges faced by both I-IMGs and C-IMGs during residency to identify actionable recommendations to support them during this critical time. We performed a multiple case study of IMGs' experiences at a large Canadian university. Within our two descriptive cases (I-IMGs, C-IMGs) we iteratively conducted twenty-two semi-structured interviews; we thematically analyzed our data within, between, and across both cases to understand challenges to IMGs' integration and opportunities for curricular innovations to facilitate their adaptation process. Research team members with different perspectives contributed reflexively to the thematic analysis. Participants identified key differences between medical culture and knowledge expected in Canada and the health systems and curricula in which they originally trained. I-IMG and C-IMG participants perceived two major challenges: discrimination because of negative labelling as IMGs and difficulties navigating their initial residency months. C-IMGs described a third challenge: frustration around the focus on the needs of I-IMGs. Participants from both groups identified two major opportunities: their desire to help other IMGs and a need for mentorship. I-IMGs and C-IMGs face diverse challenges during their training, including disorientation and discrimination. We identified specific objectives to inform the design of curriculum and support services that residency programs can offer trainees as well as important targets for resident education and faculty development.

Professional Responsibilities and Personal Impacts: Residents' Experiences as Participants in Education Research.

PURPOSE: Although the field of medical education research is growing and residents are increasingly recruited to participate as subjects in research studies, little is known about their experiences. The goal of this study was to explore the experiences and perceptions of residents who are study participants in medical education research. METHOD: A phenomenographic approach was chosen to examine the range of residents' experiences as research participants. A maximum variation sampling strategy was used to identify residents with diverse experiences. Semistructured interviews that explored experiences as research participants were conducted with 19 residents in internal medicine, general surgery, and pediatrics at the University of Toronto in 2015-2016. RESULTS: The perceptions and experiences of participants fell into two categories. First, participation was seen as a professional responsibility to advance the profession, including a desire to improve future educational practices and a sense of responsibility to contribute to the academic cause. Second, the experience was noted for its personal impact, including benefits (e.g., receiving monetary incentives or novel educational experiences) and risks (e.g., coercion and breaches of confidentiality). The time required to participate in a study was identified as one of the most important factors affecting willingness to participate and the impact of participation. CONCLUSIONS: Being a participant in medical education research can be perceived in different ways. Understanding the view of resident participants is important to optimize potential benefits and minimize risks and negative consequences for them, thus fostering ready participation and high-quality research.