RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Team Standardized Assessment of a Clinical Encounter Report (StACER) was designed for use in Geriatric Medicine residency programs to evaluate Communicator and Collaborator competencies. METHODS: The Team StACER was completed by two geriatricians and interdisciplinary team members based on observations during a geriatric medicine team meeting. Postgraduate trainees were recruited from July 2010-November 2013. Inter-rater reliability between two geriatricians and between all team members was determined. Internal consistency of items for the constructs Communicator and Collaborator competencies was calculated. Raters completed a survey previously administered to Canadian geriatricians to assess face validity. Trainees completed a survey to determine the usefulness of this instrument as a feedback tool. RESULTS: Thirty postgraduate trainees participated. The prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa range inter-rater reliability for Communicator and Collaborator items were 0.87-1.00 and 0.86-1.00, respectively. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient for Communicator and Collaborator items was 0.997 (95% CI: 0.993-1.00) and 0.997 (95% CI: 0.997-1.00), respectively. The instrument lacked discriminatory power, as all trainees scored "meets requirements" in the overall assessment. Niney-three per cent and 86% of trainees found feedback useful for developing Communicator and Collaborator competencies, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The Team StACER has adequate inter-rater reliability and internal consistency. Poor discriminatory power and face validity challenge the merit of using this evaluation tool. Trainees felt the tool provided useful feedback on Collaborator and Communicator competencies.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The long-term evolution of coexistent mitral regurgitation (MR) after aortic valve replacement (AVR) for aortic stenosis remains poorly defined. Prior studies have demonstrated that acute improvement in MR after AVR is modest, and more aggressive approaches have been advocated. This study examines the evolution of MR after AVR and identifies prognostic indicators for MR improvement. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated demographic and echocardiographic data of 423 patients who underwent primary isolated AVR for aortic stenosis with coexistent mild (n = 314) or moderate (n = 109) MR at our institution, from 2004 to 2013. For each patient, preoperative and postoperative MR was extracted from 903 echocardiograms and graded on a 0 to 4+ scale. Hierarchic linear models were used to estimate postoperative residual MR over a 5-year follow-up period. Patients were then stratified by improvement in MR, and preoperative risk factors and survival were compared between groups. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the association between survival and preoperative and postoperative MR. RESULTS: The overall acute reduction in MR was -0.23 degrees per patient. Patients with moderate MR had a -0.53 degree reduction in MR, whereas patients with mild MR had only a -0.13 degree reduction in MR (P < .001). Residual MR, however, worsened over time and regressed back to baseline, particularly in patients with preoperative moderate MR. At last follow-up, 70 (17%) patients returned to 2+ or worse MR. Residual MR at last echocardiographic follow-up was not affected by left ventricular ejection fraction, severity of preoperative aortic valve gradient (AVG), magnitude of reduction of AVG, or other comorbidities. Degree of preoperative MR did not affect midterm survival. Patients whose MR improved after AVR demonstrated a trend toward improved survival (75% vs 65% 5-year survival; P = .06), compared with those without MR whose survival remained unchanged or worsened. CONCLUSIONS: Coexistent MR modestly improves after AVR, but eventually regresses back to baseline or worsens over time in many patients. Preoperative AVG, reduction of AVG, heart failure, or atrial fibrillation was not predictive of residual MR. Moderate preoperative MR did not adversely affect 5-year survival. Patients with improvement in MR, however, demonstrated a trend toward improved survival at 5 years. More aggressive approaches for coexistent moderate MR should be considered in patients who need AVR for aortic stenosis.