On-Line Assessment (OLA) como preparación al Examen del Diploma Europeo de Anestesia y Cuidados Intensivos (EDAIC): estudio retrospectivo observacional sobre los resultados y el impacto sobre el examen Parte-I / On-Line Assessment (OLA) as a preparation for the European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (EDAIC), a retrospective observational study on the results and the potential impact on the Part-I examination

Introducción: El Examen del Diploma Europeo de Anestesia y Cuidados Intensivos (EDAIC) es un diploma de la Sociedad Europea de Anestesia y Cuidados intensivos (ESAIC), obtenido tras aprobar dos exámenes, una primera parte escrita con preguntas de tipo test y una segunda parte oral estructurada. En 2011, otra prueba formativa en línea (el OnLine Assessment [OLA]) fue introducida para ayudar los candidatos a prepararse para el primer examen (EDAIC-I). Este estudio retrospectivo observacional fue diseñado para evaluar los resultados del OLA y su impacto sobre el EDAIC-I entre 2013 y 2019. Métodos: Después de obtener la autorización del comité examinador de la ESAIC, todos los resultados de los candidatos registrados para el OLA y/o el EDAIC-I entre 2013 y 2019 fueron incluidos. El número total de inscripciones y los resultados fueron analizados y comparados para ambas pruebas. Resultados: Más de 17.000 candidatos (17.401) presentaron cualquiera de los exámenes escritos del EDAIC. La tasa de aprobados en el EDAIC-I fue del 68,95%. La nota en el OLA aumentó de manera significativa en intentos sucesivos para el Paper A (Ciencias Básicas) (p = 0,006). La tasa global de aprobados en el EDAIC-I fue más alta en los candidatos que habían presentado el OLA antes (72,9 vs. 68,3%; OR: 1,25; IC 95% [1,12; 1,39]; p < 0,001). Los candidatos que fallaron en el primer intento al EDAIC-I repitieron más el examen si habían realizado el OLA (OR: 1.396, IC 95% [1.237; 1.574]; p < 0,001). Conclusión: El OLA fue asociado a un aumento de los resultados en ciencias básicas y de la tasa de aprobados en el EDAIC-I.(AU)

Background: The EDAIC is a diploma of the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC). which is obtained after passing two a written MCQ-based (Part1) and a structured oral (part2) examinationIn 2011, a formative On-Line Assessment (OLA) was introduced to help candidates to prepare for EDAIC Part1 examination (EDAIC-I). This retrospective observational study evaluated the results of the OLA and its impact on the EDAIC-1 between 2013 and 2019. : Methods: After obtaining the authorisation from the ESAIC Examinations Committee, all the results of candidates registered to OLA and/or EDAIC-I between 2013 and 2019 were included. The total number of registrations and the results were analysed and compared for both. Results: Over 17,000 candidates (17,401) sat any of the written exams of the EDAIC. The overall pass-rate for the EDAIC-1 was 68.95%. The OLA score increased significantly with the number of attempts for Paper A (Basic Science) (p = 0.006). Overall success of the EDAIC-I was higher in candidates who took the OLA before (72.9% versus 68.3%; OR: 1.25; 95% CI [1.12; 1.39]; p< 0.001). Candidates who failed in their first attempt for EDAIC-I were more likely to sit the exam again if they had performed the OLA before (OR: 1.396, 95% CI [1.237; 1.574]; p< 0.001). Conclusion: The OLA was associated with an improvement of the results in basic science and success rate in the EDAIC-I.(AU)

On-Line Assessment (OLA) as a preparation for the European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (EDAIC), a retrospective observational study on the results and the potential impact on the Part-I examination.

BACKGROUND: The EDAIC is a diploma of the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC). which is obtained after passing two a written MCQ-based (Part1) and a structured oral (part2) examinationIn 2011, a formative On-Line Assessment (OLA) was introduced to help candidates to prepare for EDAIC Part1 examination (EDAIC-I). This retrospective observational study evaluated the results of the OLA and its impact on the EDAIC-1 between 2013 and 2019. METHODS: After obtaining the authorisation from the ESAIC Examinations Committee, all the results of candidates registered to OLA and/or EDAIC-I between 2013 and 2019 were included. The total number of registrations and the results were analysed and compared for both. RESULTS: Over 17,000 candidates (17,401) sat any of the written exams of the EDAIC. The overall pass-rate for the EDAIC-1 was 68.95%. The OLA score increased significantly with the number of attempts for Paper A (Basic Science) (p=0.006). Overall success of the EDAIC-I was higher in candidates who took the OLA before (72.9% versus 68.3%; OR: 1.25; 95% CI [1.12; 1.39]; p<0.001). Candidates who failed in their first attempt for EDAIC-I were more likely to sit the exam again if they had performed the OLA before (OR: 1.396, 95% CI [1.237; 1.574]; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The OLA was associated with an improvement of the results in basic science and success rate in the EDAIC-I.

Diploma Europeo en Anestesiología y Cuidados Intensivos en España: resultados de los exámenes de las partes 1 y 2 de los últimos cinco años. ¿Vamos por el buen camino? / European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care in Spain: Results for the part 1 and part 2 exams in the last five years. Are we going in the right direction?

Antecedentes: El Diploma Europeo en Anestesiología y Cuidados Intensivos (EDAIC) se ha convertido en un estándar de calidad entre los anestesiólogos españoles. El objetivo de este estudio retrospectivo observacional fue valorar los resultados de los participantes españoles en los dos exámenes -parte1 y parte2- en un periodo reciente de 5años, entre 2012 y 2016 y entre 2013 y 2017, respectivamente. Material y métodos: Después de obtener la autorización de la European Society of Anaesthesiology, los resultados de los dos exámenes del EDAIC fueron analizados de manera anónima en un periodo de 5años. Analizamos el número de inscripciones, la tasa de aprobados, la causa de suspensos y la nota media en ciencias básicas (cuadernilloA de la parte1 del examen y las dos primeras mesas de la parte2 del examen) y en anestesiología clínica y cuidados intensivos (cuadernilloB de la parte1 del examen y las dos últimas mesas de la parte2 del examen). Las variables cuantitativas fueron analizadas con análisis de varianza y las variables cualitativas con test de chi-cuadrado para tendencias. El nivel de significación estadística fue establecido en p<0,05. Resultados: Para la parte 1 del examen escrito, 1.189 de un total de 10.954 candidatos (10,85%) fueron inscritos en centros españoles, reflejando el crecimiento global del examen (p=0,29). La tasa de aprobados fue del 62,1%, sin diferencias significativas con los demás países (p=0,38). Las ciencias básicas supusieron el 84,1% de los suspensos. La nota media fue de 71,74+/-5,98% para las ciencias básicas (cuadernilloA) y de 74,48+/-4,29% para la anestesiología clínica (cuadernilloB). En relación con la parte2 del examen, el 72,4% de los candidatos aprobados en la parte1 del examen se inscribieron en la parte2, con una tasa de aprobados del 62,7%, versus el 62,2% en el resto del mundo (p=0,91). Los suspensos en las mesas de ciencias básicas de la parte2 del examen supusieron el 93,8% de los candidatos suspensos en la parte2 del examen. Los suspensos eliminatorios en una mesa fueron registrados en 56 (31,5%) de los candidatos suspensos, de los que el 71,3% se produjeron en las mesas de ciencias básicas. Los suspensos eliminatorios aislados se produjeron solo en 7 (3,9%) de los candidatos. Conclusiones: La evolución del EDAIC en España ha sido muy similar a la del resto del mundo. En el futuro, los esfuerzos persistentes de los anestesiólogos españoles para mejorar sus conocimientos en ciencias básicas y preparar mejor la técnica del examen oral podrían mejorar la tasa de aprobados en el EDAIC en una cohorte de candidatos en constante aumento

Background: The European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (EDAIC) has become a standard of quality among Spanish anaesthesiologists. The aim of this retrospective observational study was to assess the results of Spanish participants for the Part1 and Part2 exams over a recent five years period from 2012 to 2016 and 2013 to 2017, respectively. Material and methods: After obtaining the authorization from the European Society of Anaesthesiology, the results of both parts of the EDAIC exams were anonymously analysed for five years. We analysed the number of registrations, the pass rates, the cause for failure and the mean scores for basic sciences (paperA of part1 exam and the two first vivas of part2 exam) and clinical anaesthesia and intensive care (paperB of part1 exam and the two last vivas of part2 exam). Quantitative variables were analysed using the one-way analysis of variance, and qualitative variables using the chi-square test for trends. The level of statistical significance was set at P<.05. Results: For the written part1 exam, 1,189 of a total of 10,954 candidates (10.85%) were registered in Spanish centres, reflecting the global growth of the exam (P=.29). The pass rate was 62.1%, with no significant differences from other countries (P=.38). Basic sciences were involved in 84.1% of failing candidates. Mean scores were 71.74+/-5.98% for basic science (paperA) and 74.48+/-4.29% for clinical anaesthesiology (paperB). Regarding the part2 exam, 72.4% of the candidates who had passed the part1 exam registered for the oral part2, with a pass rate of 62.7% versus 62.2% in the rest of the world (P=.91). Failing in the basic sciences sections of the part2 resulted in 93.8% of candidates failing the part2 exam. Bad fails were registered in 56 (31.5%) of failing candidates, of which 71.3% occurred in the basic sciences vivas. Isolated bad fails only occurred in 7 (3.9%) cases. Conclusions: The evolution of the EDAIC in Spain has been very similar to evolution of the EDAIC in the rest of the world. Further efforts to improve knowledge in basic sciences and better preparation in the technique of oral examination should improve the pass rate of the EDAIC examinations from an ever-increasing cohort of candidates

European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care in Spain: Results for the part 1 and part 2 exams in the last five years. Are we going in the right direction? / Diploma Europeo en Anestesiología y Cuidados Intensivos en España: resultados de los exámenes de las partes 1 y 2 de los últimos cinco años. ¿Vamos por el buen camino?

BACKGROUND: The European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (EDAIC) has become a standard of quality among Spanish anaesthesiologists. The aim of this retrospective observational study was to assess the results of Spanish participants for the Part1 and Part2 exams over a recent five years period from 2012 to 2016 and 2013 to 2017, respectively. MATERIAL AND METHODS: After obtaining the authorization from the European Society of Anaesthesiology, the results of both parts of the EDAIC exams were anonymously analysed for five years. We analysed the number of registrations, the pass rates, the cause for failure and the mean scores for basic sciences (paperA of part1 exam and the two first vivas of part2 exam) and clinical anaesthesia and intensive care (paperB of part1 exam and the two last vivas of part2 exam). Quantitative variables were analysed using the one-way analysis of variance, and qualitative variables using the chi-square test for trends. The level of statistical significance was set at P<.05. RESULTS: For the written part1 exam, 1,189 of a total of 10,954 candidates (10.85%) were registered in Spanish centres, reflecting the global growth of the exam (P=.29). The pass rate was 62.1%, with no significant differences from other countries (P=.38). Basic sciences were involved in 84.1% of failing candidates. Mean scores were 71.74±5.98% for basic science (paperA) and 74.48±4.29% for clinical anaesthesiology (paperB). Regarding the part2 exam, 72.4% of the candidates who had passed the part1 exam registered for the oral part2, with a pass rate of 62.7% versus 62.2% in the rest of the world (P=.91). Failing in the basic sciences sections of the part2 resulted in 93.8% of candidates failing the part2 exam. Bad fails were registered in 56 (31.5%) of failing candidates, of which 71.3% occurred in the basic sciences vivas. Isolated bad fails only occurred in 7 (3.9%) cases. CONCLUSIONS: The evolution of the EDAIC in Spain has been very similar to evolution of the EDAIC in the rest of the world. Further efforts to improve knowledge in basic sciences and better preparation in the technique of oral examination should improve the pass rate of the EDAIC examinations from an ever-increasing cohort of candidates.