A Scoping Review of the Literature on Entrustable Professional Activities in Surgery Residency Programs.

OBJECTIVE: Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are a crucial component of contemporary postgraduate medical education with many surgery residency programs having implemented EPAs as a competency assessment framework to assess and provide feedback on the performance of their residents. Despite broad implementation of EPAs, there is a paucity of evidence regarding the impact of EPAs on the learners and learning environments. A first step in improving understanding of the use and impact of EPAs is by mapping the rising number of EPA-related publications from the field of surgery. The primary objective of this scoping review is to examine the nature, extent, and range of articles on the development, implementation, and assessment of EPAs. The second objective is to identify the experiences and factors that influence EPA implementation and use in practice in surgical specialties. DESIGN: Scoping review. Four electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Education Source, and ERIC) were searched on January 20, 2022, and then again on July 19, 2023. A quasi-statistical content analysis was employed to quantify and draw meaning from the information related to the development, implementation, assessment, validity, reliability, and experiences with EPAs in the workplace. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 42 empirical and nonempirical articles were included. RESULTS: Four thematic categories describe the topic areas in included articles related to: 1) the development and refinement of EPAs, including the multiple steps taken to develop and refine unique EPAs for surgery residency programs; 2) the methods for implementing EPAs; 3) outcomes of EPA use in practice; 4) barriers, facilitators, and areas for improvement for the implementation and use of EPAs in surgical education. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review highlights the key trends and gaps from the rapidly increasing number of publications on EPAs in surgery residency, from development to their use in the workplace. Existing EPA studies lack a theoretical and/or conceptual basis; future development and implementation studies should adopt implementation science frameworks to better structure and operationalize EPAs within surgery residency programs.

How Surgeons Think to Avoid Error: A Case Study of the Neurovascular Bundle Sparing During a Robotic Prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To illustrate how experts efficiently navigate a "slowing down moment" to obtain optimal surgical outcomes using the neurovascular bundle sparing during a robotic prostatectomy as a case study. DESIGN: A series of semistructured interviews with four expert uro-oncologists were completed using a cognitive task analysis methodology. Cognitive task analysis, CTA, refers to the interview and extraction of a general body of knowledge. Each interview participant completed four 1 to 2-hour semistructured CTA interviews. The interview data were then deconstructed, coded, and analyzed using a grounded theory analysis to produce a CTA-grid for a robotic prostatectomy for each surgeon, with headings of: surgical steps, simplification maneuvers, visual cues, error/complication recognition, and error/complication management and avoidance. SETTING: The study took place at an academic teaching hospital located in an urban center in Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Four expert uro-oncologists participated in the study. RESULTS: Visual cues, landmarks, common pitfalls, and technique were identified as the 4 key components of the decision-making happening during a slowing down moment in the neurovascular bundle sparing during a robotic prostatectomy. CONCLUSION: The data obtained from the CTA is novel information identifying patterns and cues that expert surgeons use to inform their surgical decision-making and avoid errors. This decision-making knowledge of visual cues, landmarks, common pitfalls and techniques is also generalizable for other surgical subspecialties. Surgeon educators, surgical teaching programs and trainees looking to improve their decision-making skills could use these components to guide their educational strategies.

Family Member Experiences in Intensive Care Units Care: Insights From a Family Involvement Tool Implementation Trial.

Family involvement is widely considered an important part of patient care in the intensive care unit. From professional health care organizations, government, and hospital associations, there has been a cultural shift toward family presence as part of a wider commitment to patient-centered care. At the same time, the meaning and impact of family involvement in the intensive care unit setting remain opaque and under-studied. This study employed an ethnographic approach to better understand family involvement in practice and from the perspective of health care professionals and family members by studying an implementation trial of a family involvement tool in two intensive care units over 2 years. The findings revealed that an expanded and self-defined role for family members as carers in the intensive care unit challenged the current configuration of the nurse patient/family relationship and that family members were aware of these dynamics. While the intensive care unit implementation teams were both motivated to implement a novel way of facilitating family involvement, the processual, organizational, and contextual factors in the intensive care units largely determined the possibilities of its application. This suggests that interventions should address the specific context in which they are employed.

Rethinking Context in Continuing Professional Development: From Identifying Barriers to Understanding Social Dynamics.

INTRODUCTION: For continuing professional development (CPD) to reach its potential to improve outcomes requires an understanding of the role of context and the influencing conditions that enable interventions to succeed. We argue that the heuristic use of frameworks to design and implement interventions tends to conceptualize context as defined lists of barriers, which may obscure consideration of how different contextual factors interact with and intersect with each other. METHODS: We suggest a framework approach that would benefit from postmodernist theory that explores how ideologies, meanings, and social structures in health care settings shape social practices. As an illustrative example, we conducted a Foucauldian discourse analysis of diabetes care to make visible how the social, historical, and political conditions in which clinicians experience, practice, and shape possibilities for behavior change. RESULTS: The discursive construction of continuing education as a knowledge translation mechanism assumes and is contingent on family physicians to implement guidelines. However, they enact other discursively constituted roles that may run in opposition. This paradoxical position creates a tension that must be navigated by family physicians, who may perceive it possible to provide good care without necessarily implementing guidelines. DISCUSSION: We suggest marrying "framework" thinking with postmodernist theory that explores how ideologies, meanings, and social structures shape practice behavior change. Such a proposed reconceptualization of context in the design of continuing professional development interventions could provide a more robust and nuanced understanding of how the dynamic relationships and interactions between clinicians, patients, and their work environments shape educational effectiveness.

Teaching Observation as a Faculty Development Tool in Medical Education: A Scoping Review.

INTRODUCTION: Health professions education often includes teaching observation to inform faculty development (FD) and indirectly improve student performance. Although these FD approaches are well received by faculty, they remain underused and/or underreported, with limited opportunities to receive feedback in workplace contexts. The goal of our study was to map the depth and breadth of education literature on the use of observation of teaching as a tool of professional development in medical education. METHODS: Following the methodology by Arksey and O'Malley, we conducted a scoping review and searched four databases for articles published in English (final searches in April 2022). RESULTS: Of 2080 articles identified, 45 met the inclusion criteria. All observation activities were associated with one of the following FD approaches: peer observation of teaching (23 articles, 51%), peer coaching (12, 27%), peer review (9, 20%), and the critical friends approach (1, 2%). Thirty-three articles (73%) concerned formative versions of the observation model that took place in clinical settings (21, 47%), and they tended to be a voluntary (27, 60%), one-off (18, 40%), in-person intervention (29, 65%), characterized by limited institutional support (13, 29%). Both barriers and challenges of teaching observation were identified. DISCUSSION: This review identified several challenges and shortcomings associated with teaching observation, such as inadequate methodological quality of research articles, inconsistent terminology, and limited understanding of the factors that promote long-term sustainability within FD programs. Practical strategies to consider when designing an FD program that incorporates teaching observation are outlined.

What do we talk about when we talk about "equipoise"? Stakeholder interviews assessing the use of equipoise in clinical research ethics.

INTRODUCTION: Equipoise, generally defined as uncertainty about the relative effects of the treatments being compared in a trial, is frequently referenced as an ethical standard for the conduct of randomized clinical trials. However, it seems to be defined in several different ways and may be used differently by different individuals. We explored how clinical researchers, chairs of research ethics boards, and philosophers of science define and reason with this term. METHODS: We completed semi-structured interviews about clinical trial ethics with 15 clinical researchers, 15 research ethics board chairs, and 15 philosophers of science/bioethicists. Each participant was asked a standardized set of 10 questions, 4 of which were specifically about equipoise. All interviews were conducted telephonically and transcribed. Responses were grouped and analysed via a modified grounded theory method. RESULTS: Forty-three respondents defined equipoise in 7 logically distinct ways, and 2 respondents could not explicitly define it. The most common definition, offered by 14 respondents (31%), defined "equipoise" as a disagreement at the level of a community of physicians. There was significant variability in definitions offered between and within groups. When asked how they would "operationalize" equipoise - i.e. check or test for its presence - respondents provided 7 alternatives, the most common being in relation to a literature review (15/45, 33%). The vast majority of respondents (35/45, 78%) felt the concept was helpful, though many acknowledged that the lack of a clear definition or operationalization was problematic. CONCLUSION: There is significant variation in definitions of equipoise offered by respondents, suggesting that parties within groups and between groups may be referring to different concepts when they reference "equipoise". This non-uniformity may impact fairness and transparency and opens the door to potential ethical problems in the evaluation of clinical trials - for instance, a patient may understand equipoise very differently than the researchers enrolling her in a trial, which could cause her agreement to participate to be based upon false premises.

The evidence base for interprofessional education within health professions education: A protocol for an update review.

Interprofessional education (IPE) interventions aiming to promote collaborative competence and improve the delivery of health and social care processes and outcomes continue to evolve. This paper reports on a protocol for an update review that we will conduct to identify and describe how the IPE evidence base has evolved in the last 7 years. We will identify literature through a systematic search of the following electronic databases: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Education Source, ERIC, and BEI. We will consider all IPE interventions delivered to health professions students and accredited professionals. Peer-reviewed empirical research studies published in any language from June 2014 onwards will be eligible for inclusion. The outcomes of interest are changes in the reaction, attitudes/perceptions, knowledge/skills acquisition, behaviors, organizational practice, and/or benefits to patients. We will perform each task of screening, critical appraisal, data abstraction, and synthesis using at least two members of the review team. The review will enable an update and comprehensive understanding of the IPE evidence base to inform future IPE developments, delivery and evaluation across education and clinical settings.

Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation and Adoption of a Continuous Quality Improvement Program in Surgery: A Case Study.

INTRODUCTION: As postoperative adverse events (AEs) drive worsened patient experience, longer length of stay, and increased costs of care, surgeons have long sought to engage in innovative approaches aimed at reducing AEs to improve the quality and safety of surgical care. While data-driven AE performance measurement and feedback (PMF) as a form of continuing professional development (CPD) has been presented as a possible approach to continuous quality improvement (CQI), little is known about the barriers and facilitators that influence surgeons' engagement and uptake of these CPD programs. The purpose of this knowledge translation informed CPD study was to examine surgeons' perspectives of the challenges and facilitators to participating in surgical CQI with the broader objective of enhancing future improvements of such CPD interventions. METHODS: Using Everett Rogers diffusion of innovations framework as a sampling frame, the participants were recruited across five surgical divisions. An exploratory case study approach, including in-depth semistructured interviews, was employed. Interview transcripts were analyzed and directly coded using the Theoretical Domains Framework. RESULTS: Directed coding yielded a total of 527 coded barriers and facilitators to behavior change pertaining to the implementation and adoption of PMF with the majority of barriers and facilitators coded in four key theoretical domains environmental context and resources, social influences, knowledge, and beliefs about consequences. A key barrier was the lack of support from the hospital necessitating surgeons' self-funding their own PMF programs. Facilitators included having a champion to drive CQI and using seminars to facilitate discussions around CQI principles and practices. DISCUSSION: This study identified multiple barriers and facilitators to surgeons' engagement and uptake of a data-driven PMF system in surgery. A key finding of the study was the identification of the influential role of positive deviance seminars as a quality improvement and patient safety mechanism that encourages surgeon engagement in PMF systems.

Attributes of excellent clinician teachers and barriers to recognizing and rewarding clinician teachers' performances and achievements: a narrative review.

Background: Over the last 31 years, there have been several institutional efforts to better recognize and reward clinician teachers. However, the perception of inadequate recognition and rewards by clinician teachers for their clinical teaching performance and achievements remains. The objective of this narrative review is two-fold: deepen understanding of the attributes of excellent clinician teachers considered for recognition and reward decisions and identify the barriers clinician teachers face in receiving recognition and rewards. Methods: We searched OVID Medline, Embase, Education Source and Web of Science to identify relevant papers published between 1990 and 2020. After screening for eligibility, we conducted a content analysis of the findings from 43 relevant papers to identify key trends and issues in the literature. Results: We found the majority of relevant papers from the US context, a paucity of relevant papers from the Canadian context, and a declining international focus on the attributes of excellent clinician teachers and barriers to the recognition and rewarding of clinician teachers since 2010. 'Provides feedback', 'excellent communication skills', 'good supervision', and 'organizational skills' were common cognitive attributes considered for recognition and rewards. 'Stimulates', 'passionate and enthusiastic', and 'creates supportive environment', were common non-cognitive attributes considered for recognition and rewards. The devaluation of teaching, unclear criteria, and unreliable metrics were the main barriers to the recognition and rewarding of clinician teachers. Conclusions: The findings of our narrative review highlight a need for local empirical research on recognition and reward issues to better inform local, context-specific reforms to policies and practices.

Contexte: Depuis 31 ans, nous sommes témoins d'efforts institutionnels visant à offrir aux cliniciens enseignants une plus grande reconnaissance et à récompenser leur travail. Cependant, d'après leur perception, la valorisation de leurs réalisations en matière d'enseignement clinique demeure insuffisante. Cette revue narrative a un double objectif : d'une part, repérer les qualités qui sont prises en considération en vue de l'octroi d'une reconnaissance officielle ou de l'attribution de récompenses (prix) aux cliniciens enseignants et d'autre part recenser les éléments qui empêchent certains candidats de se voir accorder une telle reconnaissance ou récompense. Méthodes: Nous avons effectué des recherches dans OVID Medline, Embase, Education Source et Web of Science pour repérer les articles pertinents publiés entre 1990 et 2020. Le contenu des résultats des 43 articles sélectionnés a ensuite été analysé pour dégager les principales tendances et questions abordées. Résultats: La plupart des articles pertinents se rapportaient au contexte des États-Unis. En revanche, peu d'articles pertinents concernaient celui du Canada. Sur le plan international, la question des qualités des cliniciens enseignants et des éléments qui peuvent les empêcher d'obtenir la reconnaissance ou une récompense suscite moins d'intérêt depuis 2010. Le fait « d'offrir de la rétroaction ¼, d'avoir « d'excellentes habiletés de communication ¼, d'assurer une « bonne supervision ¼, et un bon « sens de l'organisation ¼ sont des compétences cognitives souvent considérées pour l'octroi de la reconnaissance et l'attribution de récompenses. Parmi les compétences non cognitives, on note le fait d'être « stimulant ¼, d'être « passionné et enthousiaste ¼ et de « créer un environnement offrant du soutien ¼. La dévalorisation de l'enseignement, le manque de critères clairs et l'utilisation de mesures d'évaluation peu fiables sont les principaux obstacles à l'octroi de la reconnaissance ou à l'attribution d'une récompense aux cliniciens enseignants. Conclusions: Les résultats de notre revue narrative mettent en évidence la nécessité de mener des recherches empiriques localement en matière de reconnaissance et de récompense afin d'éclairer les réformes locales des politiques et des pratiques dans le milieu spécifique où elles sont appliquées.

How are randomized clinical trials ethically justified? A systematic scoping review and thematic analysis of reasons that ethically justify randomized clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: We set out to identify and count the types of reasons that are used in contemporary scholarship about the ethical permissibility of randomized trials, with the goal of developing a finer grained taxonomy of reasons than what is currently used by most participants in this literature. Because of its central role in justifying normative conclusions about randomized clinical trials (RCTs), we paid particular attention to both uses of the keyword "equipoise" and to the different concepts associated with it. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review to identify articles that included arguments that were likely to express reasons justifying RCTs. Text excerpts that expressed reasoning about the ethical permissibility of RCTs were extracted from relevant papers, and our data were generated by coding these excerpts using a mixed-methods protocol that fused elements of a grounded analysis and thematic coding. In our study, each theme corresponded to a specific type of reason that was contentful and stable when applied to our corpus of text extracts. RESULTS: Our search, screening, and text extraction process yielded 1,335 unique text excerpts, which then formed the basis of our coding. Although we found that 16 themes were sufficient to saturate this corpus, slightly less than 100% of our excerpts were covered by just 10 themes. We also tracked uses of 16 keywords in the text excerpts to explore whether there was any relationship between the keywords and our themes and found that keywords frequently did not cooccur with the presence of our themes. CONCLUSIONS: Our data and analysis support the conclusion that there is significant diversity in the types of reasons offered to justify RCTs; 10 themes effectively captured all the text excerpts we analyzed, and these themes cannot be reduced to the occurrence of relevant keywords. This result highlights how individuals and organizations may use different reasons to consider randomized trials to be justified and even when they use similar language the concepts they are referencing may not be consistent.

How gender shapes interprofessional teamwork in the operating room: a qualitative secondary analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite substantial implications for healthcare provider practice and patient outcomes, gender has yet to be systematically explored with regard to interprofessional operating room (OR) teamwork. We aimed to explore and describe how gender and additional social identity factors shape experiences and perceptions of teamwork in the OR. METHODS: This study was a qualitative secondary analysis of semi-structured interviews with OR team members conducted between November 2018 and July 2019. Participants were recruited across hospitals in Ontario, Canada. We conducted both purposive and snowball sampling until data saturation was reached. Transcripts were analyzed thematically by two independent research team members, moving from open to axial coding. RESULTS: Sixty-six interviews of OR healthcare professionals were completed: anesthesia (n=17), nursing (n=19), perfusion (n=2), and surgery (n=26). Traditional gender roles, norms, and stereotypes were perceived and experienced by both women and men, but with different consequences. Both women and men participants described challenges that women face in the OR, such as being perceived negatively for displaying leadership behaviours. Participants also reported that interactions and behaviours vary depending on the team gender composition, and that other social identities, such as age and race, often interact with gender. Nevertheless, participants indicated a belief that the influence of gender in the OR may be modified. CONCLUSIONS: The highly gendered reality of the OR creates an environment conducive to breakdowns in communuication and patient safety risks in addition to diminishing team morale, psychological safety, and provider well-being. Consequently, until teamwork interventions adequately account for gender, they are unlikely to be optimally effective or sustainable.

Paradox of Patient-Centered Care and the Implications for Patient Involvement in Continuing Professional Development.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-centered care (PCC) is widely considered as essential in chronic disease management. As the underlying rationale for engaging patients in continuing professional development (CPD) is commonly described as fostering care that is more patient-centered, we hoped to understand the discursive conditions for how educators and health professionals can (or cannot) learn with, from, and about patients. METHODS: Using diabetes as a case, we conducted a Foucauldian discourse analysis of an archive of relevant policy documents, professional and educational texts, to explore different conceptualizations of practice and the implications for PCC. We also conducted in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of physicians to understand their experiences in providing and teaching PCC. We sought to understand: How has PCC been discursively constructed? Whose interests does advocating PCC serve? What are the implications for patient involvement in CPD? RESULTS: We describe three discursive constructions of PCC, each extending the reach of biomedical power. PCC as a disease intervention emphasizes knowing and relating to patients to normalize laboratory test results. PCC as a form of confession promotes patients to come to their own realizations to become responsible for their own health, but through the lens and evaluation of physicians. PCC as a disciplinary technique makes visible the possibility of using a checklist to judge physician competency in providing PCC. DISCUSSION: PCC may be constructed in ways that paradoxically reinforce rather than challenge conventional, provider-centric paradigms. Our results challenge educators to acknowledge the existence and effects of discourses when involving patients in the planning and delivery of CPD.