Cost of Training Crisis: Anaesthetics.

The anaesthetic training programme in the United Kingdom (UK) spans over seven years and is overseen by the Royal College of Anaesthetists (RCOA). Junior doctors in England are currently striking amid ongoing pay negotiations with the government, and almost all junior doctors are worried about the cost of living. This article provides an overview of the average financial cost of training for doctors in the anaesthetic training programme. The cost incurred by anaesthetic trainees illustrates the level of financial burden faced by trainees across multiple specialities. The cost includes: student loan repayment (with interest rates), compulsory membership fees (including the Royal College of Anaesthetists and General Medical Council), postgraduate examinations (Fellowship of the Royal College of Anaesthetist exams are compulsory to complete training) and medical indemnity. The average trainee spends between 5.6% and 7.4% of their annual salary on non-reimbursable costs. This article delineates for aforementioned expenses and compares them with the training programs in Australia and New Zealand, given their status as frequent emigration destinations for UK doctors.

[ChatGPT for use in technology-enhanced learning in anesthesiology and emergency medicine and potential clinical application of AI language models : Between hype and reality around artificial intelligence in medical use]. / ChatGPT im Einsatz für "technology-enhanced learning" in Anästhesiologie und Notfallmedizin und potenzielle klinische Anwendung von KI­Sprachmodellen : Zwischen Hype und Wirklichkeit um künstliche Intelligenz im medizinischen Einsatz.

BACKGROUND: The utilization of AI language models in education and academia is currently a subject of research, and applications in clinical settings are also being tested. Studies conducted by various research groups have demonstrated that language models can answer questions related to medical board examinations, and there are potential applications of these models in medical education as well. RESEARCH QUESTION: This study aims to investigate the extent to which current version language models prove effective for addressing medical inquiries, their potential utility in medical education, and the challenges that still exist in the functioning of AI language models. METHOD: The program ChatGPT, based on GPT 3.5, had to answer 1025 questions from the second part (M2) of the medical board examination. The study examined whether any errors and what types of errors occurred. Additionally, the language model was asked to generate essays on the learning objectives outlined in the standard curriculum for specialist training in anesthesiology and the supplementary qualification in emergency medicine. These essays were analyzed afterwards and checked for errors and anomalies. RESULTS: The findings indicated that ChatGPT was able to correctly answer the questions with an accuracy rate exceeding 69%, even when the questions included references to visual aids. This represented an improvement in the accuracy of answering board examination questions compared to a study conducted in March; however, when it came to generating essays a high error rate was observed. DISCUSSION: Considering the current pace of ongoing improvements in AI language models, widespread clinical implementation, especially in emergency departments as well as emergency and intensive care medicine with the assistance of medical trainees, is a plausible scenario. These models can provide insights to support medical professionals in their work, without relying solely on the language model. Although the use of these models in education holds promise, it currently requires a significant amount of supervision. Due to hallucinations caused by inadequate training environments for the language model, the generated texts might deviate from the current state of scientific knowledge. Direct deployment in patient care settings without permanent physician supervision does not yet appear to be achievable at present.

Differences between resident self-assessments and faculty- assessments on Anesthesiology Milestones and associated factors: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate self-assessment is crucial for the professional development of physicians. There has been sparse data on the accuracy of self-assessments on Anesthesiology Milestones. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences between resident self-assessments and faculty-assessments on Anesthesiology Milestones and the associated factors. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study conducted in a general tertiary university-affiliated hospital. We included anesthesia residents who were enrolled in the standardized residency training program in postgraduate year two and three at the time of the Milestone evaluation. We requested evaluations of competencies from both the Clinical Competency Committee faculty and the anesthesia residents themselves, utilizing the Chinese version of Anesthesiology Milestones in January 2023 and January 2024. The primary outcome was the differences between self- and faculty-assessments, calculated by subtracting the faculty-rated score from the self-rated score on each subcompetency. RESULTS: A total of 46 and 42 residents were evaluated in year 2023 and 2024, respectively. The self-rated sum score was significantly higher than that rated by faculty [mean (standardized deviation): 120.39 (32.41) vs. 114.44 (23.71), P = 0.008 in paired t test] with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.55 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.31 to 0.70]. The Bland-Altman plots revealed significant overestimation in patient care (bias 0.32, 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.60), practice-based learning and improvement (bias 0.45, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.84), and professionalism (bias 0.37, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.72). Ratings from residents with master's degrees (mean difference: -1.06, 95% CI: -1.80 to -0.32, P = 0.005) and doctorate degrees (mean difference: -1.14, 95% CI: -1.91 to -0.38, P = 0.003) were closer to the faculty-assessments than residents with bachelor's degrees. Compared with patient care, the differences between self- and faculty- rated scores were smaller in medical knowledge (mean difference: -0.18, 95% CI: -0.35 to -0.02, P = 0.031) and interpersonal and communication skills (mean difference: -0.41, 95% CI: -0.64 to -0.19, P < 0.001) in the generalized estimating equation logistic regression model. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that residents tended to overestimate themselves, emphasizing the need to improve the accuracy of Milestones self-assessment. The differences between self- and faculty-assessments were associated with residents' degrees and domains of competency.

Navigating the complex dynamics of anesthesiologists' professional identity formation in the context of their specialty training program: a phenomenographic perspective.

BACKGROUND: A specialty training program is crucial for shaping future specialist doctors, imparting clinical knowledge and skills, and fostering a robust professional identity. This study investigates how anesthesiologists develop their professional identity while navigating unique challenges specific to their specialty. The formation of professional identity in anesthesiology significantly influences doctors' well-being, teamwork, and ultimately patient care, making it a crucial aspect of anesthesiology education. Utilizing a phenomenographic approach, the research explores the learners' personal experiences and perspectives of professional identity formation in their specialty training programs, providing valuable insights for enhancing future anesthetic educational programs. METHOD: The data for this phenomenographic study were collected through semi-structured interviews with anesthesiology trainees and specialists, guided by open-ended questions. The interviews were conducted at a Swedish university hospital, and participant selection used purposive sampling, providing rich and diverse data for analysis after 15 interviews. Iterative analysis followed the seven-step phenomenographic approach. The research team, comprising qualitative research and anesthesiology education experts, ensured result validity through regular review, discussion, and reflective practices. RESULTS: The study reveals three fundamental dimensions: 'Knowledge of Subject Matter,' 'Knowledge of Human Relations,' and 'Knowledge of Affect.' These dimensions offer insights into how anesthesiologists comprehend anesthesiology as a profession, navigate interactions with colleagues and patients, and interpret emotional experiences in anesthesiology practice - all crucial elements in the formation of professional identity. The findings could be synthesized and further described by three conceptions: The Outcome-Driven Learner, the Emerging Collaborator, and the Self-Directed Caregiver. CONCLUSION: The study uncovers differing learner understandings in the development of anesthesiologists' professional identity. Varying priorities, values, and role interpretations highlight the shortcomings of a generic, one-size-fits-all educational strategy. By acknowledging and integrating these nuanced learner perspectives, as elucidated in detail in this study, the future of anesthesia education can be improved. This will necessitate a holistic approach, intertwining both natural sciences and humanities studies, focus on tacit knowledge, and flexible teaching strategies, to guarantee thorough professional development, lifelong learning, and resilience.

Continuing medical education for attending physicians in anesthesia: Feasibility of an innovative blended learning approach.

Continuing medical education plays a pivotal role in fostering and upholding the standard of excellence in medicine. Both SPOC (small private online course) and BOPPPS (bridge-in, learning objective, pretest, participatory learning, posttest, and summary) methodologies are rooted in the same educational and learning theories, emphasizing active student engagement, interaction, and feedback. Using ultrasound-guided spinal anesthesia as an exemplar, we aimed to investigate the feasibility of blended teaching (combination of BOPPPS and SPOC) for anesthesiology clinicians and explore trainees' and trainers' perspectives towards the innovative method. Twenty-seven attending anesthesiologists were randomly divided into experimental group (n = 14, blended teaching method) and control group (n = 13, traditional teaching method). The questionnaire was administered before and a week post-training. Their operative skills (measured by operation time) were assessed. The students' cognitive evaluation of the blended teaching mode was conducted in the experimental group. The experimental group demonstrated notably higher theoretical scores compared to the control group [(46.42 ±â€…5.345) vs (41.92 ±â€…5.219), t = 2.213, P < .05]. The operation time in the experimental group was significantly shorter than that in the control group [(84.79 ±â€…28.450) seconds vs (114.23 ±â€…35.607) seconds, t = -2.383, P < .05]. Most participants preferred blended learning as it was more effective than traditional learning. Suggestions for enhancement included enhanced online interactivity with trainers and the inclusion of case analysis. Integration of blended teaching incorporating BOPPPS and SPOC methodologies holds promise for enhancing the efficiency of skill training among anesthesiologists. Blended learning may become a viable and well-received option among anesthesia clinicians in China.

Point-of-care ultrasound in pediatric anesthesiology: considerations for training and credentialing.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss considerations surrounding the use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in pediatric anesthesiology. RECENT FINDINGS: POCUS is an indispensable tool in various medical specialties, including pediatric anesthesiology. Credentialing for POCUS should be considered to ensure that practitioners are able to acquire images, interpret them correctly, and use ultrasound to guide procedures safely and effectively. In the absence of formal guidelines for anesthesiology, current practice and oversight varies by institution. In this review, we will explore the significance of POCUS in pediatric anesthesiology, discuss credentialing, and compare the specific requirements and challenges currently associated with using POCUS in pediatric anesthesia. SUMMARY: Point-of-care ultrasound is being utilized by the pediatric anesthesiologist and has the potential to improve patient assessment, procedure guidance, and decision-making. Guidelines increase standardization and quality assurance procedures help maintain high-quality data. Credentialing standards for POCUS in pediatric anesthesiology are essential to ensure that practitioners have the necessary skills and knowledge to use this technology effectively and safely. Currently, there are no national pediatric POCUS guidelines to base credentialing processes on for pediatric anesthesia practices. Further work directed at establishing pediatric-specific curriculum goals and competency standards are needed to train current and future pediatric anesthesia providers and increase overall acceptance of POCUS use.

Simulation in pediatric anesthesiology: current state and visions for the future.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Simulation is a well established practice in medicine. This review reflects upon the role of simulation in pediatric anesthesiology in three parts: training anesthesiologists to care for pediatric patients safely and effectively; evaluating and improving systems of care for children; and visions for the future. RECENT FINDINGS: Simulation continues to prove a useful modality to educate both novice and experienced clinicians in the perioperative care of infants and children. It is also a powerful tool to help analyze and improve upon how care is provided to infants and children. Advances in technology and computational power now allow for a greater than ever degree of innovation, accessibility, and focused reflection and debriefing, with an exciting outlook for promising advances in the near future. SUMMARY: Simulation plays a key role in developing and achieving peak performance in the perioperative care of infants and children. Although simulation already has a great impact, its full potential is yet to be harnessed.

Interdisciplinary Simulation Courses to Train Residents on Communication of Unexpected Complications from Perioperative Care: A Randomized Comparison of Within-Event (Microdebriefing) and Postscenario Debriefing.

INTRODUCTION: Training to disclose bad news in a pluridisciplinary format facilitates communication and improves learning. There are many different debriefing methods described in the literature. The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate the value of final debriefing and microdebriefing with interruptions of the scenario in a simulation program about communication in unexpected complications from perioperative care. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, single center study between October 2018 and July 2019 in a simulation center. Three scenarios were related to patient or family disclosure of complications which had occurred during gynecologic surgery by a dyad involving 2 residents (a gynecology and an anesthesia resident). All sessions involved 6 residents (3 gynecologist and 3 anesthesiologist). The main outcome measure was the immediate residents' self-assessment of the impact of the course on their medical practice immediately after the session. RESULTS: We performed 15 simulation sessions including 80 residents. Thirty-nine residents were included in final debriefing group and 41 in micro-debriefing group. There was no significant difference on the impact for medical practice between groups (9.3/10 in the micro-debriefing group versus 9.2 in the final debriefing group (p = 0.53)). The overall satisfaction was high in the 2 group (9.1/10 in the 2 groups). CONCLUSION: This study is the first one to compare two debriefing methods in case of breaking bad news simulation. No difference between the 2 techniques was found concerning the students' feelings and short and long-term improvement of their communication skills.

Regional anaesthesia education for consultants and specialists in the UK: a mixed-methods analysis.

BACKGROUND: Regional anaesthesia plays an important role in perioperative care, but gaps in proficiency persist among consultants and specialists. This study aimed to assess confidence levels in performing Plan A blocks among this cohort and to examine the barriers and facilitators influencing regional anaesthesia education. METHODS: Utilising a mixed-methods design, we performed a quantitative survey to gauge self-reported confidence in performing Plan A blocks, coupled with qualitative interviews to explore the complexities of educational barriers and facilitators. UK consultant and specialist anaesthetists were included in the study. RESULTS: A total of 369 survey responses were analysed. Only 22% of survey respondents expressed confidence in performing all Plan A blocks. Specialists (odds ratio [OR] 0.391, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.179-0.855, P=0.016) and those in their roles for >10 yr (OR 0.551, 95% CI 0.327-0.927, P = 0.024) reported lower confidence levels. A purposive sample was selected for interviews, and data saturation was reached at 31 interviews. Peer-led learning emerged as the most effective learning modality for consultants and specialists. Barriers to regional anaesthesia education included apprehensions regarding complications, self-perceived incompetence, lack of continuing professional development time, insufficient support from the multidisciplinary team, and a lack of inclusivity within the regional anaesthesia community. Organisational culture had a substantial impact, with the presence of local regional anaesthesia champions emerging as a key facilitator. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights persistent perceived deficiencies in regional anaesthesia skills among consultants and specialists. We identified multiple barriers and facilitators, providing insights for targeted interventions aimed at improving regional anaesthesia education in this group.

Domains Influencing Faculty Decisions on the Level of Supervision Required for Anesthesiology EPAs with Analysis of Feedback Comments.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine responses related to entrustment and feedback comments from an assessment tool. DESIGN: Qualitative analyses using semi-structured interviews and analysis of narrative comments. SETTING: Main hospital OR suite at a large academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: faculty, and residents who work in the OR suite. RESULTS: Seven of the 14 theoretical domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework were identified as influencing faculty decision on entrustment: knowledge, skills, intention, memory/attention/decision processes, environmental context, and resources, beliefs of capabilities, and reinforcement. The majority (651/1116 (58.4%)) of faculty comments were critical/modest praise and relevant, consistent across all 6 EPAs. The written in feedback comments for all 1,116 Web App EPA assessments yielded a total of 1,599 sub-competency specific responses. These responses were mapped to core competencies, and at least once to 13 of the 23 ACGME subcompetencies. CONCLUSIONS: Domains identified as influencing faculty decision on entrustment were knowledge, skills, intention, memory/attention/decision processes, environmental context, and resources, beliefs of capabilities, and reinforcement. Most narrative feedback comments were critical/modest praise and relevant, consistent across each of the EPAs.

Effect of a non-reactive absorbent with or without environmentally oriented electronic feedback on anesthesia provider's fresh gas flow rates: A greening initiative.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of a non-reactive carbon dioxide absorbent (AMSORB® Plus) versus a traditional carbon dioxide absorbent (Medisorb™) on the FGF used by anesthesia providers and an electronic educational feedback intervention using Carestation™ Insights (GE HealthCare) on provider-specific change in FGF. DESIGN: Prospective, single-center cohort study set in a greening initiative. SETTING: Operating room. PARTICIPANTS: 157 anesthesia providers (i.e., anesthesiology trainees, certified registered nurse anesthetists, and solo anesthesiologists). INTERVENTIONS: Intervention #1 was the introduction of AMSORB® Plus into 8 Aisys CS2, Carestation™ Insights-enabled anesthesia machines (GE HealthCare) at the study site. At the end of week 6, anesthesia providers were educated and given an environmentally oriented electronic feedback strategy for the next 12 weeks of the study (Intervention #2) using Carestation™ Insights data. MEASUREMENTS: The dual primary outcomes were the difference in average daily FGF during maintenance anesthesia between machines assigned to AMSORB® Plus versus Medisorb™ and the provider-specific change in average fresh gas flows after 12 weeks of feedback and education compared to the historical data. MAIN RESULTS: Over the 18-week period, there were 1577 inhaled anesthetics performed in the 8 operating rooms (528 for intervention 1, 1049 for intervention 2). There were 1001 provider days using Aisys CS2 machines and 7452 provider days of historical data from the preceding year. Overall, AMSORB® Plus was not associated with significantly less FGF (mean - 80 ml/min, 97.5% confidence interval - 206 to 46, P = .15). The environmentally oriented electronic feedback intervention was not associated with a significant decrease in provider-specific mean FGF (-112 ml/min, 97.5% confidence interval - 244 to 21, P = .059). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that introducing a non-reactive absorbent did not significantly alter FGF. Using environmentally oriented electronic feedback relying on data analytics did not result in significantly reduced provider-specific FGF.

Unprofessionalism in anesthesiology: A qualitative study on classifying unprofessional behavior in anesthesiology residency education.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify the domains that constitute behaviors perceived to be unprofessional in anesthesiology residency training programs. DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING: Anesthesiology residency training programs. PATIENTS: Not applicable. The participants involved residents, fellows, and faculty members purposefully sampled in four US-based anesthesiology residency programs. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were asked to submit examples of unprofessional behavior they witnessed in anesthesiology residents, fellows, or faculty members via a Qualtrics link. MEASUREMENTS: Not applicable. The behavior examples were independently reviewed and categorized into themes using content analysis. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 116 vignettes were collected, resulting in a final list of 111 vignettes after excluding those that did not describe behavior exhibited by anesthesiology faculty or trainees. Fifty-eight vignettes pertained to unprofessional behaviors observed in faculty members and 53 were observed in trainees (residents and fellows). Nine unprofessionalism themes emerged in the analysis. The most common themes were VERBAL, SUPERVISION, QUALITY, ENGAGEMENT, and TIME. As to the distribution of role group (faculty versus trainee) by theme, unprofessional behaviors falling into the categories of BIAS, GOSSIP, LEWD, and VERBAL were observed more in faculty; whereas themes with unprofessional behavior primarily attributed to trainees included ENGAGEMENT, QUALITY, TIME, and SUPERVISION. CONCLUSION: By reviewing reported professionalism-related vignettes within residency training programs, we identified classification descriptors for defining unprofessional behavior specific to anesthesiology residency education. Findings from this study enrich the definition of professionalism as a multi-dimensional competency pertaining to anesthesiology graduate medical education. This framework may facilitate preventative intervention and timely remediation plans for unprofessional behavior in residents and faculty.

Opioid-free anesthesia: a practical guide for teaching and implementation.

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) represents an innovative approach that prioritizes patient safety, reduces the risks associated with opioid use, and seeks to enhance recovery. Few descriptions regarding the practical and implementation aspects exist. This review serves as a practical guide on OFA teaching and application. We briefly discuss the historical use of opioids in anesthesia, side effects and their consequences. We discuss pedagogical avenues and challenges, as well as implementation of OFA in less experienced settings. Opioid use in anesthesia originally coexisted with OFA. During the last decades, the advent of multimodal analgesia has resulted in decreased opioid dosages both before and after surgery. Recently, OFA increased in popularity, supported by meta-analyses, due to reduced nausea and vomiting, with a potential, even if limited, impact on pain. OFA, as part of rational prescribing, may contribute to a more patient-centered approach. Different strategies for OFA implementation coexist. Educational aspects, leadership, guidelines, local guidance, and training are all important. We propose a framework for OFA implementation with concrete options, including patient preparation, choice of OFA pharmacological agents (according to type of surgery and patient), and postoperative care. Whilst opioids still have an important place in pain management, they have brought harms that we cannot ignore. Evidence for using opioid-sparing and OFA techniques continues to emerge and there is a need to personalize more approaches. In this review, we provide evidence-based, relatively simple methods that can be used in implementing and delivering OFA.