Developing and Assessing the Feasibility of Implementing a Surgical Objective Structured Clinical Skills Examination (S-OSCE).

OBJECTIVE: To1 describe the development and evaluate the feasibility of a surgical objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) for the purpose of competency assessment based on the Royal College of Canada's CanMEDS framework. DESIGN: A unique surgical OSCE was developed to evaluate the clinical and surgical management of common orthopaedic problems using simulated patients and cadaveric specimens. Cases were graded by degree of difficulty (less complex, complex, more complex) Developing an assessment tool with significant resource utilization and good correlation with traditional methods is challenging. The feasibility of an OSCE that evaluates independent clinical and surgical decision making was evaluated. In addition, as part of establishing construct validity, correlation of OSCE scores with previously validated O-scores was performed. SETTING: A tertiary level academic teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-four Postgraduate year 3-5 trainees of a 5-year Canadian orthopedic residency program creating 96 operative case performances available for final review. RESULTS: The development of the OSCE cases involved a multistep process with attending surgeons, residents and a surgical education consultant. There were 4 different OSCE days, over a 3 year period (2016-2018) encompassing a variety of less complex and more complex procedures. Performance on the OSCE correlated strongly with the (O-SCORE, 0.89) and a linear regression analysis correlated moderately with year of training (r2 = 0.5737). The feasibility analysis demonstrated good financial practicality with solid programmatic integration. CONCLUSIONS: The unique surgical OSCE scores correlate strongly with an established entrustability scale. Administering this OSCE to evaluate preoperative and intraoperative decision making to complement other forms of assessment is feasible. The financial burden to training programs is modest in comparison to the insight gained by both residents and faculty.

Efficacy of two mandibular advancement appliances in the management of snoring and mild-moderate sleep apnea: a cross-over randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Mandibular advancement appliances (MAA) are a recognized alternative treatment to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for mild-moderate obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS). The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of and subject satisfaction with two MAA in the management of OSAS. METHODS: Five women and 11 men (47.9+/-1.6 years), previously untreated with CPAP, were recruited from a sleep disorders clinic following a polysomnographic diagnosis of mild-moderate OSAS with Respiratory Disturbance Index (RDI) of 9.4+/-1.1. A randomized single blind cross-over study was completed with both Klearway and Silencer (three months for each study arm). Subjects completed standardized questionnaires on sleep quality, sleepiness and functional outcomes (Functional Outcome Sleep Questionnaire: FOSQ). MAA satisfaction (e.g., comfort) and efficacy (e.g., reduction of respiratory noises, headache) were assessed by subjects and sleep partner. RESULTS: The two MAA (Silencer 4.7+/-0.9 and Klearway 6.5+/-1.3) significantly reduced the RDI compared to the baseline night (10.0+/-1.2, respectively p<0.001 and p<0.01). The RDI was slightly lower with the Silencer (p0.05) but subjects' preference for comfort was in favor of the Klearway (Klearway 7.0+/-0.4 vs Silencer 5.8+/-0.4, p=0.04). The Epworth score, FOSQ, respiratory noise and morning headache were also improved following use of both appliances (p0.05 to 0.001). CONCLUSION: Although both MAA decreased RDI and subjective daytime sleepiness in a similar manner, the choice between various types of MAA needs to be taken into account when considering the benefit of RDI reduction over the benefit of subject compliance. The long term benefit of increased RDI reduction vs. a better subject compliance needs to be assessed in prospective studies.

Position paper by Canadian dental sleep medicine professionals on the role of different health care professionals in managing obstructive sleep apnea and snoring with oral appliances.

The present Canadian position paper contains recommendations for the management by dentists of sleep-disordered breathing in adults with the use of oral appliances (OAs) as a treatment option for snoring and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). The recommendations are based on literature reviews and expert panel consensus. OAs offer an effective, first-line treatment option for patients with mild to moderate OSA who prefer an OA to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy, or for severe OSA patients who cannot tolerate CPAP, are inappropriate candidates for CPAP or who have failed CPAP treatment attempts. The purpose of the present position paper is to guide interdisciplinary teamwork (sleep physicians and sleep dentists) and to clarify the role of each professional in the management of OA therapy. The diagnosis of OSA should always be made by a physician, and OAs should be fitted by a qualified dentist who is trained and experienced in dental sleep medicine. Follow-up assessment by the referring physician and polysomnography or sleep studies are required to verify treatment efficacy. The present article emphasizes the need for a team approach to OA therapy and provides treatment guidelines for dentists trained in dental sleep medicine. Many of the dentists and sleep physicians who contributed to the preparation of the present article are members of the Canadian Sleep Society and the authors reached a consensus based on the current literature.

Mandibular advancement appliances remain effective in lowering respiratory disturbance index for 2.5-4.5 years.

OBJECTIVE: The mandibular advancement appliance (MAA) is now recognized as a first-line therapy option for mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS). The aim of this follow-up study was to re-assess the long-term efficacy of MAAs provided to patients in a previous comparative study. METHODS: Sixteen subjects had participated in a previous comparative study in which the efficacy and compliance of two MAAs (Klearway - K and Silencer - S) were compared in a randomized cross-over design. At the end of the previous comparative study, subjects selected the MAA they preferred. Nine chose the K and seven the S. Fifteen subjects were available for a follow-up interview and 14 (4 women and 10 men; mean ± SEM: 51.9 ± 1.7 y.o.) agreed to participate in an overnight sleep recording at a hospital sleep laboratory from January to February 2009. The mean time lag between the end of the previous comparative study and the follow-up was 40.9 ± 2.1 months (range of 2.5-4.5 years). Comparisons were made across the three polysomnographic evaluations (PSGE): baseline, the night with the appliance of their choice at the end of the previous comparative study, and the follow-up night. Subjects completed the Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS), the fatigue severity scale (FSS), and a quality of life questionnaire (FOSQ). RESULTS: At the follow-up, the respiratory disturbance index (RDI) remained significantly lower than baseline (p<0.001). Questionnaire responses revealed that ESS, FSS, and FOSQ remained improved at follow-up (p<0.02). Body mass index (BMI) increased slightly from baseline to follow-up (p<0.05). Diastolic and systolic blood pressure and cardiac rhythm decreased significantly from baseline to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The MAAs remained effective in improving RDI, sleepiness, blood pressure, cardiac rhythm, fatigue, sleep quality, and quality of life over a period of 2.5-4.5 years. The rise in BMI is a concern that merits further examination.