Moesgaardshannon7030

Background Program directors of anesthesiology residencies agree that it is the program's responsibility to prepare residents for primary American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) certification, although few report an Objective Standardized Clinical Exam (OSCE) program reflective of the new ABA examination. We created an authentic simulated OSCE (SOSCE) using existing resources to prepare third-year clinical anesthesia residents for the ABA APPLIED exam before graduation and identify knowledge gaps relevant to the OSCE. Methods Junior anesthesiology residents and medical students acted as standardized patients for the 7 SOSCE stations. Third-year clinical anesthesia residents were evaluated on performance by faculty educators during the SOSCE and completed surveys regarding their experience. Follow-up surveys were distributed to participants after they completed the ABA APPLIED Exam. Results Mean scores ranged from 82.6% correct (echocardiogram) to 97.2% correct (ultrasonography). Knowledge gaps were present in competencies explicitly stated as objectives by the ABA. Echocardiography scores improved from 76.1% in the first year to 90.0% in the second year (P = .009). Participants found the SOSCE to be valuable in preparing for the OSCE and the standardized patients' performance to be convincing. Participants felt better prepared for the ABA exam and thought that the SOSCE was authentic in content and process. Conclusions An SOSCE program can be developed with preexisting resources. This program was highly rated as useful and informative, an accurate reflection of the ABA OSCE, and helpful in preparation for the examination. Development of a SOSCE program is feasible, sustainable, and valuable. © 2019 Society for Education in Anesthesia.Background Although obtaining medical consent is an important skill, many residents may have knowledge gaps in understanding key concepts of informed consent or may lack awareness of serious procedural risks. The objective of this study was to see if formal education makes a difference in anesthesiology residents' ability to obtain an informed consent. Methods Thirty-four first-year anesthesiology residents (CA1s) were randomized into either a control group or study group. The control group learned how to obtain consent for general anesthesia the current way, which is by observing senior residents or faculty. The study group received additional formal education, which included a video, a narrated lecture, and a quiz. Afterwards, both groups were observed obtaining informed consent on patients receiving general anesthesia. The investigators used a checklist consisting of 10 important items that the resident had to fulfill for a proper informed consent. To minimize bias, neither the control group nor the study group was shown the checklist. selleck chemicals llc Results Overall, the study group did significantly better than the control group in fulfilling the 10 items on the checklist (median 0.90 vs 0.70; P less then .001). There were statistical differences on 4 key components identifying all persons on the anesthesia team (76.5% vs 5.9%, P less then .0001), explaining why general anesthesia is necessary (82.4% vs 35.3%, P less then .0134), explaining the risks and benefits of general anesthesia (94.1% vs 47.1%, P less then .0066), and discussing the risks and benefits of blood transfusion (70.59% vs 29.4%, P less then .0381). Conclusions This study shows that formal instruction on informed consent enhances residents' ability to obtain an informed consent. © 2019 Society for Education in Anesthesia.Background Case-based learning (CBL) is a distinct classroom-based teaching format. We compare learning and retention using a CBL teaching strategy vs simulation-based learning (SBL) on the topic of malignant hyperthermia. Methods In this study, 54 anesthesia residents were assigned to either a CBL or SBL experience. All residents had prior simulation experience, and both groups received a pretest and a lecture on rare diseases with emphasis on malignant hyperthermia followed by a CBL or SBL session. Test questions were validated for face and construct validity. Postsession testing occurred on the same day and at 4 months. Results Twenty-seven residents completed all components of the study. The CBL group had 10 residents, and the SBL group had 17 residents. Most residents (80%) had previous exposure to malignant hyperthermia education. ANOVA for repeated measures demonstrated superior learning and long-term retention in the CBL group. In addition, our cost analysis reveals the cost of SBL to be approximately 17 times more expensive per learner than CBL. Conclusions We found that CBL promoted learning and long-term retention for the topic of malignant hyperthermia and it is a more affordable teaching method. Affordability and effectiveness evidence may guide some programs toward CBL, particularly if access to simulation is limited. The number of participants and full validation of the examination questions are limitations of the study. Further studies are required to validate the findings of this study. © 2019 Society for Education in Anesthesia.Background Providing clinical faculty to lead high-quality resident didactic sessions remains a challenge for academic departments that host graduate medical education training programs. In an effort to both reduce costs and to continue to recruit faculty to give lectures, our department began to incentivize clinicians with a $500 stipend in place of a nonclinical day to present didactics. Our hypothesis is that with financial incentive, more attendings would present didactics and the quality would improve. Methods Residents routinely evaluate all didactic sessions using a Likert scale of 1 to 5. Residents also answer yes or no to indicate whether the presenter should return. We compared academic year (AY) 2016, in which faculty were incentivized with nonclinical time, with AY 2017 and AY 2018, in which incentive came in the form of a $500 stipend. For each, the mean Likert score and percentage of positive responses for lecturer returning were calculated. A 1-way ANOVA and post hoc t tests were performed to determine significant changes.