Accreditation Council For Graduate Medical Education Research Articles

A National Survey of Pregnancy and Parenthood Among Nephrology Trainees: A Focus on Nephrology Fellowship.

National and international policies on parental leave for physician trainees are inconsistent. Physician trainees, including nephrology fellows, may be at higher risk of pregnancy complications. Physician trainees face barriers in meeting their breastfeeding goals and in finding childcare due to nontraditional work hours with extended or unpredictable shifts. Here, we examine awareness of current policies in United States (US) nephrology fellowship programs regarding parental leave, pregnancy/breastfeeding accommodations, and fellows' perspectives on family planning. An anonymous, on-line survey of US nephrology fellows was undertaken from June 9 to August, 24, 2023. One hundred twenty nephrology fellows submitted the survey. A majority of fellow respondents were unaware of parental leave policies of their training programs (63%), Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) (75%), and/or American Board of Medical Specialties(ABMS) (75%). Forty two percent were unaware of the duration of parental leave at their program. Nearly 45% of all respondents were unsure if their program limited night shifts or shifts greater than 24 hours for pregnant trainees. Forty three percent reported they were unsure of lactation accommodations, and 40% were unsure of access to subsidized childcare. When fellows received work accommodations for pregnancy or parenthood, their work obligations were largely covered by co-fellows (60%) or attendings (38%). Over 60% of fellows agreed or strongly agreed that they would avoid a pregnancy in fellowship due to concern they would have to extend their training. Of the 40 fellows who chose to pursue pregnancy or parenthood during medical training, 75% did not change their career plans as a result. Most nephrology fellows were unaware of parental leave policies and pregnancy/lactation accommodations. While the topic itself has a broad impact to all physician trainees, there is need for improved awareness about national and local program policies among trainees across individual nephrology programs.

Variation in Oral Board Examination Accommodations Among Specialties

Board certification can have broad implications for candidates' career trajectories, and prior research has found sociodemographic disparities in pass rates. Barriers in the format and administration of the oral board examinations may disproportionately affect certain candidates. To characterize oral certifying examination policies and practices of the 16 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited specialties that require oral examinations. This cross-sectional study was conducted from March 1 to April 15, 2023, using data on oral examination practices and policies (examination format, dates, and setting; lactation accommodations; and accommodations for military deployment, family emergency, or medical leave) as well as the gender composition of the specialties' boards of directors obtained from websites, telephone calls and email correspondence with certifying specialists. The percentages of female residents and residents of racial and ethnic backgrounds who are historically underrepresented in medicine (URM) in each specialty as of December 31, 2021, were obtained from the Graduate Medical Education 2021 to 2022 report. For each specialty, accommodation scores were measured by a modified objective scoring system (score range: 1-13, with higher scores indicating more accommodations). Poisson regression was used to assess the association between accommodation score and the diversity of residents in that specialty, as measured by the percentages of female and URM residents. Linear regression was used to assess whether gender diversity of a specialty's board of directors was associated with accommodation scores. Included in the analysis were 16 specialties with a total of 46 027 residents (26 533 males [57.6%]) and 233 members of boards of directors (152 males [65.2%]). The mean (SD) total accommodation score was 8.28 (3.79), and the median (IQR) score was 9.25 (5.00-12.00). No association was found between test accommodation score and the percentage of female or URM residents. However, for each 1-point increase in the test accommodation score, the relative risk that a resident was female was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.96-1.16), and the relative risk that an individual was a URM resident was 1.04 (95% CI, 1.00-1.07). An association was found between the percentage of female board members and the accommodation score: for each 10% increase in the percentage of board members who were female, the accommodation score increased by 1.20 points (95% CI, 0.23-2.16 points; P = .03). This cross-sectional study found considerable variability in oral board examination accommodations among ACGME-accredited specialties, highlighting opportunities for improvement and standardization. Promoting diversity in leadership bodies may lead to greater accommodations for examinees in extenuating circumstances.

Female and underrepresented minority representation in radiology

Rational and objectiveDiversity, equity, inclusion, and representation in various sectors have garnered increasing attention in the past two decades, including healthcare. In this report we investigate representation of females and underrepresented minorities (URM) in the field of radiology and asses for significant growth trends in representation in residency training programs in the United States. Materials and methodsDe-identified trainee demographic information for active radiology trainees from 2016 to 2021 was queried using the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), and new radiology trainees using the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP)’s Main Residency Match Data and Reports databooks. ResultsIn 2021 females represented 26.7% of DR residency trainees and 22% of IR integrated trainees. In the same year URM trainees represented 11.3% of trainees and 8.7% of IR integrated trainees. From 2017 to 2021, diagnostic radiology had a compound average growth rate (CAGR) 1% (p <0.01) of female representation and 1.12% (p<0.01) of URM representation. ConclusionThis study quantifies female and underrepresented minority representation among radiology trainees for diagnostic radiology and radiology subspecialities, identifying modest uptrends in representation within both demographics.

Variability in Surgical Case Volume Performed During ACGME-Accredited Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Fellowship Training.

Previous studies have demonstrated a positive correlation between case volume and outcomes in foot and ankle surgery. This study elucidates surgical case volume benchmarks for Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited orthopaedic foot and ankle fellowship training in the United States. The ACGME provided case logs for orthopaedic residents and foot and ankle fellows (2018-2021). Variabilities in reported fellowship case volumes were defined as the fold-difference between 90th and 10th percentiles. Reported case volumes were compared between training cohorts with parametric tests. Case logs from 65 orthopaedic foot and ankle fellows and 3146 orthopaedic residents were included. Fellows reported 1.3- to 1.5-fold more foot and ankle cases during fellowship training than during residency training (P < .001). On average, orthopaedic foot and ankle fellows reported 405.4 cases and most were arthrodesis (17%), forefoot reconstruction (17%), mid/hindfoot reconstruction (13%), tendon repair/transfer (12%), and trauma ankle hindfoot (11%). Case categories with the highest variabilities were amputation (14.8-fold difference), infection/tumor (11.6-fold difference), arthroscopy (9.2-fold difference), and calcaneus (8.7-fold difference). Case volume benchmarks can assist trainees and faculty during orthopaedic foot and ankle training. More research is needed to determine case minimum requirements needed for autonomous practice in foot and ankle surgery. Level III.

Very Few ACGME-accredited Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Programs Have Web-accessible Leave Policies Dedicated to Parental Leave for Residents, Despite ACGME Requirements.

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires that all graduate medical education (GME) programs provide at least 6 paid weeks off for medical, parental, and caregiver leave to residents. However, it is unclear whether all orthopaedic residency programs have adapted to making specific parental leave policies web-accessible since the ACGME's mandate in 2022. This gap in policy knowledge leaves both prospective and current residents in the dark when it comes to choosing residency programs, and knowing what leave benefits they are entitled to when having children during training via birth, surrogacy, adoption, or legal guardianship. (1) What percentage of ACGME-accredited orthopaedic surgery residency programs provide accessible parental leave policies on their program's website, their GME website, and through direct contact with their program's administration? (2) What percentage of programs offer specific parental leave policies, generic leave policies, or defer to the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)? As indicated in the American Medical Association's 2022 Freida Specialty Guide, 207 ACGME-accredited orthopaedic residency programs were listed. After further evaluation using previous literature's exclusion criteria, 37 programs were excluded based on osteopathic graduate rates. In all, 170 ACGME-accredited allopathic orthopaedic surgery residency programs were identified and included in this study. Three independent reviewers assessed each program website for the presence of an accessible parental leave policy. Each reviewer accessed the program's public webpage initially, and if no parental leave policy was available, they searched the institution's GME webpage. If no policy was found online, the program administrator was contacted directly via email and phone. Available leave policies were further classified into five categories by reviewers: parental leave, generic leave, deferred to FMLA, combination of parental and FMLA, and combination of parental and generic leave. Our results demonstrated that 6% (10 of 170) of orthopaedic residency programs had policy information available on their program's main orthopaedic web page. Fifty nine-percent (101 of 170) of orthopaedic residency programs had a clearly stated policy on their institution's GME website. The remaining 35% (59 of 170) had no information on their public website and required direct communication with program administration to obtain policy information. After directly contacting program administration, 12% (21 of 170) of programs responded to researchers request with a PDF explicitly outlining their policy. Twenty-two percent (38 of 170) of programs did not have an accessible policy available. Of the programs that had available policies, a total of 53% (70 of 132) of programs were categorized as offering explicit parental leave policies, 9% (12 of 132) were categorized as offering general leave policies, and 27% (36 of 132) deferred to FMLA. Seven percent (9 of 132) offered combined parental leave policies with FMLA, and 4% (5 of 132) offered combined general leave policies with FMLA. Although most ACGME-accredited allopathic orthopaedic surgery residency programs met the ACGME requirement of written parental leave policies in 2023, a small minority of programs have clear, accessible parental leave policies provided on their webpage. Parental leave policies should be easily accessible to prospective and current trainees and should clearly state compensation and length of leave. Ensuring orthopaedic surgery residency programs provide accessible and transparent parental leave policies is important for maintaining diversity in prospective applicants and supporting the work-life balance of current residents.

Cytopathology fellowship and practice: Are our trainees and cytopathologists diverse?

Over the last several years, there has been increased focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion within all areas of pathology and laboratory medicine. Many of the specialty societies within pathology have taken up the mantle of diversity. While there is little research into the diversity of cytopathologists in practice, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) has been collecting diversity data on pathology and laboratory medicine trainees since 2011. This data are an opportunity to explore how diverse our trainees in cytopathology are, and by extrapolation, allows us to develop some ideas as to how diverse attending level cytopathologists are. The author will also share personal observations from her own training and career regarding diversity in cytopathology.

Trends in minimally invasive and open inguinal hernia repair: an analysis of ACGME general surgery case logs.

Groin hernia repair is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures and is often performed by surgical interns and junior residents. While traditionally performed open, minimally invasive (MIS) groin hernia repair has become an increasingly popular approach. The purpose of this study was to determine the trends in MIS and open inguinal and femoral hernia repair in general surgery residency training over the past two decades. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) national case log data of general surgery residents from 1999 through 2022 were reviewed. We collected means and standard deviations of open and MIS inguinal and femoral hernia repairs. Linear regression and ANOVA were used to identify trends in the average annual number of open and MIS hernia repairs logged by residents. Cases were distinguished between level of resident trainees: surgeon-chief (SC) and surgeon-junior (SJ). From July 1999 to June 2022, the average annual MIS inguinal and femoral hernia repairs logged by general surgery residents significantly increased, from 7.6 to 47.9 cases (p < 0.001), and the average annual open inguinal and femoral hernia repairs logged by general surgery residents significantly decreased, from 51.9 to 39.7 cases (p < 0.001). SJ resident results were consistent with this overall trend. For SC residents, the volume of both MIS and open hernia repairs significantly increased (p < 0.001). ACGME case log data indicates a trend of general surgery residents logging overall fewer numbers of open inguinal and femoral hernia repairs, and a larger proportion of open repairs by chief residents. This trend warrants attention and further study as it may represent a skill or knowledge gap with significant impact of surgical training.

The Impact of Financial Education on Stress Among Orthopaedic Surgeons.

Financial stress has been an increasing area of concern for residents and attendings. The primary goal of this study was to determine the financial education level and differentiate financial outcome measures of orthopaedic surgery residents and attendings. A survey of all residents and attendings of the 201 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited orthopaedic surgery programs in the United States. Total participation in the study was 118 residents (postgraduate year (PGY) 1-5), three fellows (PGY6), and 57 attending orthopaedic surgeons. A significant difference existed between average current financial stress scores between residents versus attending (2.32 vs 1.17), but not Doctor of Medicine (MD) versus Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (DO) attendings (0.96 vs 1.67) and MD versus DO residents (2.25 vs 2.50). There was a significant difference in average future financial stress scores between residents and attendings (1.85 vs 1.44) and MD vs DO residents (1.61 vs 2.25) but no difference between MD vs DO attending (1.31 vs 1.63). Residents' confidence in financial knowledge compared to college graduates had a significantly negative Pearson coefficient with current financial stress score, while the attending group was not significant. Orthopaedic residents and attending physicians' financial stress levels are positively correlated with the amount of student debt they hold. Most residents who currently have no personal finance education offered in their residency would likely attend a personal finance course if offered. Decreasing the amount of debt held by residents, increasing their financial knowledge, and helping them develop good financial habits would likely lead to a decrease in financial stress.

Feedback perceptions of first year medical residents: An intervention-based survey study.

Feedback in residency is a necessity for progression toward clinical competency and is included in The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) milestones as an essential component for accreditation. Our study elucidates perceptions of feedback of first-year residents and aims to identify how these perceptions change after education on building expertise through deliberate practice. First-year internal medicine and neurology residents of a mid-sized university-affiliated residency program answered a five-question 5-point unipolar response scale questionnaire regarding feedback perceptions before and after attending a workshop about building expertise through effective feedback during residency orientation. Related-Samples Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test was applied for comparing pre- versus post-questionnaire data. Of 31 first-year residents, 29 completed the pre-questionnaire for a completion rate of 93.5%, while 24 of 31 completed the post-questionnaire for a completion rate of 77.4%. Of the five questions, three improved when comparing pre and post responses to, including the questions on confidence in the ability to procure feedback (p = <0.001), the effort put into procuring feedback (p = 0.001), and frequency of seeking feedback (p = 0.002). Interest in receiving feedback and the importance of feedback remained unchanged after workshop attendance. Residents should be educated on building expertise through deliberate practice and how to obtain high-quality feedback, given the emphasis and essentiality of feedback within the milestone assessment system and the core competencies of ACGME. In our study, education on these topics led to significant improvement in resident perceptions of confidence in the ability to procure feedback, effort put into procuring feedback, and frequency at which feedback would be sought.

Barriers to increasing paid parental leave in U.S. neurology residencies: a survey of program directors

BackgroundThe American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology (ABPN) and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) require that residency programs allow at least 6 weeks of parental leave. The American Medical Association (AMA) recommends 12 weeks of paid parental leave. Despite these recommendations, there is little information about parental leave policies across U.S. neurology residencies. The objective of our study was to assess parental leave policies in U.S. adult neurology residencies and barriers to increasing the duration of leave.MethodsWe distributed an anonymous online survey to U.S. adult neurology program directors (PDs) to assess demographics, components and length of parental leave, perceived impact on residents’ clinical training and academic development, and barriers to increasing the length of leave.ResultsWe contacted 163 PDs and received 54 responses (response rate of 33%). 87% reported policies for both childbearing and non-childbearing residents. The average maximal length of leave allowed without extension of training was 8.5 weeks (range 0–13) for childbearing and 6.2 weeks (range 0–13) for non-childbearing residents. Most PDs felt that parental leave had a positive impact on resident wellness and neutral impact on clinical competency, academic opportunities, and career development. The most common barriers to providing a 12-week paid policy were concerns about equity in the program (82%), staffing of clinical services (80%), and impact on clinical training (78%).ConclusionsAlthough most programs in our study have parental leave policies, there is significant variability. Policies to improve parental leave should focus on addressing common barriers, such as additional solutions to staffing clinical services.

Picking Apart a Program Evaluation Committee: A Multiple Case Study Characterizing Primary Care Residency Program Evaluation Committee Structure, Program Improvement, and Outcomes.

As of 2014, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) mandates initiating a Program Evaluation Committee (PEC) to guide ongoing program improvement.However, little guidance nor published reports exist about how individual PECs have undertaken this mandate. To explore how four primary care residency PECs configure their committees, review program goals and undertake program evaluation and improvement. We conducted a multiple case study between December 2022 and April 2023 of four purposively selected primary care residencies (e.g., family medicine, pediatrics, internal medicine). Data sources included semi-structured interviews with four PEC members per program and diverse program artifacts. Using a constructivist approach, we utilized qualitative coding to analyze participant interviews and content analysis for program artifacts. We then used coded transcripts and artifacts to construct logic models for each program guided by a systems theory lens. Results: Programs adapt their PEC structure, execution, and outcomes to meet short- and long-term needs based on organizational and program-unique factors such as size and local practices. They relied on multiple data sources and sought diverse stakeholder participationto complete program evaluation and improvement. Identified deficiencies were often categorized as internal versus external to delineate PEC responsibility, boundaries, and feasibility of interventions. The broad guidance provided by the ACGME for PEC configuration allows programs to adapt the committee based on individual needs. However, further instruction on program evaluation and organizational change principles would augment existing PEC efforts.

Comparing Graduating Plastic Surgery Residents' Case Logs With Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Requirements, Content at National Meetings, and In-Service Examination Test Items.

The importance of adaptable and up-to-date plastic surgery graduate medical education (GME) has taken on new meaning amidst accelerating surgical innovation and increasing calls for competency-based training standards. We aimed to examine the extent to which the procedures plastic surgery residents perform, as represented in case log data, align with 2 core standardized components of plastic surgery GME: ACGME (Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education) minimum procedure count requirements and the PSITE (Plastic Surgery In-Service Training Examination). We also examined their alignment with procedural representation at 2 major plastic surgery meetings. Nine categories of reconstructive and aesthetic procedures were identified. Three-year averages for the number of procedures completed in each category by residents graduating in 2019-2021 were calculated from ACGME national case log data reports. The ACGME procedure count minimum requirements were also ascertained. The titles and durations of medical programming sessions scheduled for Plastic Surgery The Meeting (PSTM) 2022 and the Plastic Surgery Research Council (PSRC) Annual Meeting 2022 were retrieved from online data. Finally, test items from the 2020 to 2022 administrations of the PSITE were retrieved. Conference sessions and test items were assigned to a single procedure category when possible. Percent differences were calculated for comparison. The distribution of procedures on plastic surgery resident case logs differs from those of the major mechanisms of standardization in plastic surgery GME, in-service examination content more so than ACGME requirements. Meeting content at PSTM and PSRC had the largest percent differences with case log data, with PSTM being skewed toward aesthetics and PSRC toward reconstructive head and neck surgery. The criteria and standards by which plastic surgery residents are evaluated and content at national meetings differ from the procedures they actually complete during their training. Although largely reflecting heterogeneity of the specialty, following these comparisons will likely prove useful in the continual evaluation of plastic surgery residency training, especially in the preparation of residents for the variety of training and practice settings they pursue.

Beyond medical knowledge: a didactic curriculum focused on knowledge, wisdom, and application

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to determine whether a flipped classroom curriculum coupled with case-based learning would improve residents’ perceptions of the learning environment, improve education outcomes, and increase faculty engagement. Research suggests that active learning yields better educational results compared with passive learning. However, faculty are more comfortable providing lectures that require only passive participation from learners. METHODS A council was created to identify issues with the current format of the resident didactic curriculum and to redesign the neurosurgical curriculum and conference per Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirements. Trends from the authors’ 2022 and 2023 ACGME Resident Surveys were tracked to assess changes in the organizational learning environment. Surveys of resident participants were conducted to assess learner satisfaction. RESULTS Between July 2022 and June 2023, the authors gathered 127 survey responses from neurosurgical residents. The majority of respondents, comprising 50.4% (n = 64), were postgraduate year (PGY)–4 and PGY-5 residents. Sixty-six percent (n = 84) reported that the new format ranked within the top third of sessions they had experienced. On analysis of trends from these 2022 and 2023 ACGME Resident Surveys, the authors observed a positive trajectory in various key components. Notably, there was an upward trend in achieving an appropriate balance between service and education, in the availability of protected time for structured learning, faculty engagement and interest in education, and amount of clinical and didactic teaching. CONCLUSIONS The results of this study suggest that this innovative educational model can have a positive impact on residents’ perceptions of the learning environment, their educational outcomes, and faculty engagement. As residency education continues to evolve, the flipped classroom model offers an exciting avenue for enhancing the quality of residency education.

The Diversity of Surgical Trainees Index Identifies Racial and Ethnic Disparities Among Surgical Specialties

BackgroundRacial and ethnic disparities have been well-described among surgical specialties, however, variations in underrepresented minority (URiM) representation between these specialties have not previously been quantified. MethodsData collected from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) annual reports were used to derive the Diversity of Surgical Trainee Index (DoSTI) metric, which was calculated as the proportion of URiM resident and fellow physicians within a given surgical specialty, relative to the overall proportion of URiM trainees within all surgical and non-surgical ACGME-accredited programs in the same academic year. ResultsFrom 2013 to 2022, a total of 108,193 ACGME-accredited residency programs trained 1,296,204 residents and fellows in the United States. Of these, 14.1% (n=182,680) of trainees self-identified as URiM over the study period. The mean DoSTI among all surgical specialties was 0.80 (standard error, 0.01) compared with all ACGME-accredited programs. High DoSTI specialties incorporated significantly higher proportions of Hispanic (8.7% vs 6.3%) and Black (5.2% vs 2.5%) trainees compared with low DoSTI specialties (p<0.0001 each). General surgery (1.06±0.01), plastic surgery (traditional) (1.12±0.06), vascular surgery (integrated) (0.96±0.03), and vascular surgery (traditional) (0.94±0.06) had the highest DoSTI indices (p<0.05 each vs composite). On linear regression analysis, only ophthalmology (+0.01/year, R2=0.41, p=0.019), orthopedic surgery (+0.01/year, R2=0.33, p=0.047), otolaryngology (+0.02/year, R2=0.86, p<0.001), and pediatric surgery (+0.06/year, R2=0.33, p=0.048) demonstrated an annual increase in DoSTI. ConclusionThe Diversity of Surgical Trainees Index is a novel metric used to quantify the degree of URiM representation among surgical specialties. DoSTI has revealed specialty-specific variations in racial/ethnic minority representation among surgical training programs. This metric may be used to improve provider awareness, identify high performing DoSTI specialties to highlight their best practices, and ultimately, recruit a more diverse surgical workforce.

The current state of training in pain medicine fellowships: An Association of Pain Program Directors (APPD) survey of program directors.

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) approved the first pain medicine fellowship programs over three decades ago, designed around a pharmacological philosophy. Following that, there has been a rise in the transition of pain medicine education toward a multidisciplinary interventional model based on a tremendous surge of contemporaneous literature in these areas. This trend has created variability in clinical experience and education amongst accredited pain medicine programs with minimal literature evaluating the differences and commonalities in education and experience of different pain medicine fellowships through Program Director (PD) experiences. This study aims to gather insight from pain medicine fellowship program directors across the country to assess clinical and interventional training, providing valuable perspectives on the future of pain medicine education. This study involved 56 PDs of ACGME-accredited pain fellowship programs in the United States. The recruitment process included three phases: advanced notification, invitation, and follow-up to maximize response rate. Participants completed a standard online questionnaire, covering various topics such as subcategory fields, online platforms for supplemental education, clinical experience, postgraduate practice success, and training adequacy. Surveys were completed by 39/56 (69%) standing members of the Association of Pain Program Directors (APPD). All PDs allowed fellows to participate in industry-related and professional society-related procedural workshops, with 59% encouraging these workshops. PDs emphasized the importance of integrity, professionalism, and diligence for long-term success. Fifty-four percent of PDs expressed the need for extension of fellowship training to avoid supplemental education by industry or pain/spine societies. This study highlights the challenge of providing adequate training in all Pain Medicine subtopics within a 12-month pain medicine fellowship. PDs suggest the need for additional training for fellows and discuss the importance of curriculum standardization.

Examining differences in trends in the orthopedic surgery match for osteopathic and allopathic medical graduates after the transition to single accreditation.

The landscape of medical education in the United States has undergone significant changes, particularly with the rise of osteopathic medical students, constituting a substantial portion of medical school entrants. The merger of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) in 2020 opened residency slots to allopathic graduates that were previously historically allocated to osteopathic (Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine [DO]) physicians. This has impacted various medical specialties, notably orthopedic surgery. Despite an increase in orthopedic surgery applicants, the match rates for DO candidates have faced challenges, raising concerns about the impact of this merger on the future of orthopedic training for DO students. This research aims to analyze the trends in orthopedic surgery match rates for DO vs MD applicants since the single accreditation merger, which began in 2015 with a 5-year transition period that was finalized by 2020. By examining factors such as application numbers, research output, standardized test scores, and program director preferences, the study seeks to identify disparities and challenges faced by DO applicants in securing orthopedic surgery residencies. This study utilized publicly available data from the National Residency Match Program (NRMP) 2018, 2020, and 2022 reports. Data encompassed applicant characteristics, including standardized test scores, research experiences, and match outcomes. The study also incorporated insights from NRMP program director surveys, focusing on interview and ranking practices. The analysis involved comparisons of application numbers, match rates, research productivity, and test scores between DO and MD applicants. Statistical analysis was employed to identify any statistically significant differences among the examined variables for the 3 years included in the study. The research revealed a consistent increase in orthopedic surgery applicants from both DO and MD backgrounds. However, MD applicants consistently had higher match rates compared to their DO counterparts, with the gap narrowing over the years. Notably, disparities persisted in research output, with MD applicants demonstrating a significant advantage in publications and presentations. Standardized test scores, although slightly higher for MD applicants, did not significantly impact the differences in match rates. MD applicants had statistically significantly higher numbers of applicants (P = .0010), number of publications (P = .0091), and number of research experiences (P = .0216) over the years examined. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the scores on Step 1 (P = .5038) or Step 2 (P = .4714) between MD and DO candidates. Despite progress in the acceptance and ranking of DO applicants by program directors, the study highlights enduring challenges in orthopedic surgery match rates between DO and MD candidates. The lack of research opportunities for DO students stands out as a crucial area for improvement, necessitating systemic changes within medical education. Addressing this disparity and ensuring equal access to research experiences could mitigate the gap in match rates, promoting a more equitable environment for all aspiring orthopedic surgeons, regardless of their medical background. Such efforts are vital to fostering inclusivity and enhancing opportunities for osteopathic medical students pursuing competitive specialties like orthopedic surgery.

Development of an integrated milestone assessment tool across multiple early-adopter programs for breaking bad news: a pilot project

BackgroundThe transition of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) to milestone assessment creates opportunities for collaboration and shared assessments across graduate medical programs. Breaking bad news is an essential communication skill that is a common milestone across almost every medical specialty. The purpose of this study was to develop and pilot an integrated milestone assessment (IMA) tool for breaking bad news using ACGME milestone criteria and to compare the IMA tool with the existing SPIKES protocol.MethodsThe IMA tool was created using sub-anchors in professionalism and interpersonal communication skills that are applicable to every specialty and to the ability to break bad news. Two cases of breaking bad news, designed to be “easy” and “intermediate” in difficulty, were used to assess basic skills in breaking bad news in first-year medical residents from six residency specialties. Eight standardized patients were trained to portray the cases in sessions held in November 2013 and May 2014. Standardized patients completed an assessment checklist to evaluate each resident’s performance in breaking bad news based on their use of the SPIKES protocol and IMA tool. Residents answered post-encounter questions about their training and comfort in breaking bad news. The association between SPIKES and IMA scores was investigated by simple linear regression models and Spearman rank correlations.ResultsThere were 136 eligible medical residents: 108 (79.4%) participated in the first session and 97 (71.3%) participated in the second session, with 96 (70.6%) residents participating in both sessions. Overall, we were able to identify residents that performed at both extremes of the assessment criteria using the integrated milestone assessment (IMA) and the SPIKES protocol. Interestingly, residents rated themselves below “comfortable” on average.ConclusionWe developed an integrated milestone assessment (IMA) that was better than the SPIKES protocol at assessing the skill of breaking bad news. This collaborative assessment tool can be used as supplement tool in the era of milestone transformation. We aim assess our tool in other specialties and institutions, as well as assess other shared milestones across specialties.

Assessment approaches in undergraduate health professions education: towards the development of feasible assessment approaches for low-resource settings

BackgroundFeasible and effective assessment approaches to measuring competency in health sciences are vital in competency-based education. Educational programmes for health professions in low- and middle-income countries are increasingly adopting competency-based education as a strategy for training health professionals. Importantly, the organisation of assessments and assessment approaches must align with the available resources and still result in the fidelity of implementation. A review of existing assessment approaches, frameworks, models, and methods is essential for the development of feasible and effective assessment approaches in low-resource settings.MethodsPublished literature was sourced from 13 electronic databases. The inclusion criteria were literature published in English between 2000 and 2022 about assessment approaches to measuring competency in health science professions. Specific data relating to the aims of each study, its location, population, research design, assessment approaches (including the outcome of implementing such approaches), frameworks, models, and methods were extracted from the included literature. The data were analysed through a multi-step process that integrated quantitative and qualitative approaches.ResultsMany articles were from the United States and Australia and reported on the development of assessment models. Most of the articles included undergraduate medical or nursing students. A variety of models, theories, and frameworks were reported and included the Ideal model, Predictive Learning Assessment model, Amalgamated Student Assessment in Practice (ASAP) model, Leadership Outcome Assessment (LOA) model, Reporter-Interpreter-Manager-Educator (RIME) framework, the Quarter model, and the model which incorporates four assessment methods which are Triple Jump Test, Essay incorporating critical thinking questions, Multistation Integrated Practical Examination, and Multiple Choice Questions (TEMM) model. Additional models and frameworks that were used include the Entrustable Professional Activities framework, the System of Assessment framework, the Reporter-Interpreter-Manager-Educator (RIME) framework, the Clinical Reasoning framework (which is embedded in the Amalgamated Student Assessment in Practice (ASAP) model), Earl’s Model of Learning, an assessment framework based on the Bayer–Fetzer Kalamazoo Consensus Statement, Bloom's taxonomy, the Canadian Medical Education Directions for Specialists (CanMEDS) Framework, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) framework, the Dreyfus Developmental Framework, and Miller's Pyramid.ConclusionAn analysis of the assessment approaches, frameworks, models, and methods applied in health professions education lays the foundation for the development of feasible and effective assessment approaches in low-resource settings that integrate competency-based education.Trial registrationThis study did not involve any clinical intervention. Therefore, trial registration was not required.

Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Milestone Training Ratings and Surgeons’ Early Outcomes

National data on the development of competence during training have been reported using the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestones system. It is now possible to consider longitudinal analyses that link Milestone ratings during training to patient outcomes data of recent graduates. To evaluate the association of in-training ACGME Milestone ratings in a surgical specialty with subsequent complication rates following a commonly performed operation, endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). This study of patient outcomes followed EVAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) registry (4213 admissions from 208 hospitals treated by 327 surgeons). All surgeons included in this study graduated from ACGME-accredited training programs from 2015 through 2019 and had Milestone ratings 6 months prior to graduation. Data were analyzed from December 1, 2021, through September 15, 2023. Because Milestone ratings can vary with program, they were corrected for program effect using a deviation score from the program mean. Milestone ratings assigned to individual trainees 6 months prior to graduation, based on judgments of surgical competence. Surgical complications following EVAR for patients treated by recent graduates during the index hospitalization, obtained using the nationwide Society for Vascular Surgery Patient Safety Organization's VQI registry, which includes 929 participating centers in 49 US states. The study included outcomes for 4213 patients (mean [SD] age, 73.25 [8.74] years; 3379 male participants [80.2%]). Postoperative complications included 9.5% major (400 of 4213 cases) and 30.2% minor (1274 of 4213 cases) complications. After adjusting for patient risk factors and site of training, a significant association was identified between individual Milestone ratings of surgical trainees and major complications in early surgical practice in programs with lower mean Milestone ratings (odds ratio, 0.50; 95% CI; 0.27-0.95). In this study, Milestone assessments of surgical trainees were associated with subsequent clinical outcomes in their early career. Although these findings represent one surgical specialty, they suggest Milestone ratings can be used in any specialty to identify trainees at risk for future adverse patient outcomes when applying the same theory and methodology. Milestones data should inform data-driven educational interventions and trainee remediation to optimize future patient outcomes.

Early Emergency Medicine Milestone Assessment for Predicting First-Year Resident Performance.

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires emergency medicine (EM) residency training programs to monitor residents' progress using standardized milestones. The first assessment of PGY 1 resident milestones occurs midway through the first year and could miss initial deficiencies. Early assessment of PGY 1 EM resident milestones has potential to identify at-risk residents prior to standard midyear evaluations. We developed an orientation syllabus for PGY 1 residents followed by a milestone assessment. Assessment scores helped predict future milestone scores and American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) In-Training Examination (ITE) scores for PGY 1 residents. From 2013 to 2020, we developed and implemented Milestone Evaluation Day (MED), a simulation-based day and written exam assessing PGY 1 EM residents during their first month on the 23 ACGME 1.0 milestones. MED stations included a history and physical with verbal presentation, patient simulation, vascular access, wound management, and airway management. MED, Clinical Competency Committee-generated (CCC-generated) milestone, and ABEM ITE scores were averaged and compared utilizing Pearson's correlation coefficient. Of 112 PGY 1 EM residents, 110 (98%) were analyzed over an 8-year period. We observed a moderate positive correlation of MED and CCC-generated milestone scores (r = .34, p < .001). There was a nonstatistically significant weak positive correlation of MED and ABEM ITE scores (r = .13, p = .17). An early assessment of EM milestones in the PGY 1 year can assist in the prediction of CCC-generated milestone scores for PGY 1 residents.