Transitioning to a new era: Future directions for staff development during COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic created an urgent need for staff development. However, COVID-19 has created many challenges, including the inability to meet in-person, travel restrictions to conferences, overwhelming clinical demands on already overextended faculty members and the increased need to focus on personal health and safety. Although current challenges were immediately met with solutions borne out of an emergency, questions remain on how to identify and sustain best practices and further evolve staff development beyond the immediate crisis. Reviewing the Medical Adaptations series revealed several lessons. Several authors used cognitive apprenticeship to provide scaffolding upon which learners can build skills, knowledge and attitudes. Additionally, moderators were recommended during live educational sessions in order to manage the chat box and engage the audience. Comprehensive IT support was key. A post-session debrief helped deepen understanding and provided a space for peer support and community building. Building a repository for educational materials was recommended. Although we made significant gains in the ability to offer staff development, we must consider potential and unintended consequences and explore how we can use transformative learning theory to capitalize on what we have gained. Utilizing technology can potentially increase access to online learning; however, when not implemented carefully, it can magnify inequities. While providing IT support can serve to mitigate some inequities borne by socioeconomic and generational differences, additional strategies should be implemented to account for English as a second-language learners; those with disabilities who do not have access to adaptive technology; and other marginalized groups who may already feel vulnerable to presenting arguments in oppositions of authority or the majority. Crafting online education experiences to allow for small group, peer-to-peer and social interactions is vital to continued professional and identity development. Now that the urgency has lessened, taking time to ensure what is being offered follows best practices in developing and disseminating quality online education is paramount for broad acceptance.

Faculty Development Provided During Work Hours: A Mixed-Methods Pilot Study for Developing Clinician Educators.

Background: Faculty development is important but often limited by conflict with ongoing responsibilities. The Oregon Health & Science University Department of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine schedules more faculty physicians to work on Wednesdays, with nonclinical time in the morning and a clinical assignment in the afternoon, to facilitate a resident physician academic half-day (AHD). We designed a novel faculty development course to run in the mornings of the AHD using Kern's 6-step approach to curriculum development and hypothesized that it would be feasible and satisfactory. Methods: A needs assessment was performed. Two experts in medical education developed the curriculum and sought faculty with medical education training to lead sessions. Five participants completed pre-intervention, daily session, and post-intervention surveys. Satisfaction was evaluated by surveys. Feasibility was evaluated by session attendance and surveys. Kirkpatrick's model for program evaluation was used, and a thematic analysis was performed. Results: All participants responded "Strongly Agree" to all participant satisfaction post-intervention questions. All participants were able to meet the >50% attendance goal, only missing sessions when pre-call, post-call, on vacation, or ill. All participants reported changes in behavior and reported developing their clinician educator professional identities. One participant reported re-affirming their commitment to academic medicine. Conclusions: This faculty development pilot course provided during work hours was feasible, and participants were highly satisfied. In addition, thematic analysis suggests that the course helped faculty develop a clinician educator professional identity and changed their behavior. Future work will include a qualitative study to understand the impact on participant behavior and professional identity formation.

Effects of epidural analgesia on recovery after open colorectal surgery.

The use of epidural analgesia (EA) has been suggested as an integral part of an enhanced recovery program for colorectal surgery. However, the effects of EA on postoperative outcomes and hospital length of stay remain controversial. Data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database for 2014 and 2015 were queried for adult patients who underwent elective open colorectal surgery. We included only cases with general anesthesia as the main anesthetic. Cases with other types of anesthesia were excluded. A 1:3 matched sample of EA versus non-EA cases was created based on propensity scores. The primary outcome of interest was the occurrence of major cardiopulmonary complications within 7 days of the surgery. Secondary outcome measures were hospital length of stay and 30-day mortality. A total of 24,927 patients were included in the analysis. EA was utilized in 15.02% (n = 3745). The cumulative risk over the study period for major cardiopulmonary complications was 2.52% (n = 627). There were no statistically significant differences in the rate of postoperative complications (relative risk 0.91, 95% CI 0.66-1.27, P = 0.59), length of stay (median [interquartile range], EA 6 [5-9] versus non-EA 6 [4-9] days, P = 0.36), and 30-day mortality rate (relative risk 0.71, 95% CI 0.42-1.20, P = 0.20) between the two propensity-matched cohorts. In conclusion, our study revealed that the benefits of EA in patients undergoing open colorectal surgery are limited, as it does not influence immediate postoperative cardiopulmonary complications or hospital length of stay.