36
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Entrustable professional activities and curricular milestones for fellowship training in pulmonary and critical care medicine: report of a multisociety working group.

      Chest
      American College of Chest Physicians

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This article describes the curricular milestones and entrustable professional activities for trainees in pulmonary, critical care, or combined fellowship programs. Under the Next Accreditation System of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), curricular milestones compose the curriculum or learning objectives for training in these fields. Entrustable professional activities represent the outcomes of training, the activities that society and professional peers can expect fellowship graduates to be able to perform unsupervised. These curricular milestones and entrustable professional activities are the products of a consensus process from a multidisciplinary committee of medical educators representing the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST), the American Thoracic Society, the Society of Critical Care Medicine, and the Association of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine Program Directors. After consensus was achieved using the Delphi process, the document was revised with input from the sponsoring societies and program directors. The resulting lists can serve as a roadmap and destination for trainees, program directors, and educators. Together with the reporting milestones, they will help mark trainees' progress in the mastery of the six ACGME core competencies of graduate medical education.

          Related collections

          Most cited references8

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Trends in the use of the pulmonary artery catheter in the United States, 1993-2004.

          Although there is now substantial evidence that pulmonary artery (PA) catheterization does not reduce mortality in critically ill patients, it is unknown whether national utilization has decreased in response. To determine trends in PA catheterization use in the United States. A time trend analysis on national estimates of PA catheterization utilization from 1993-2004 using data from all US states contributing to the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Hospital admissions for those participants aged 18 years or older were assessed, with primary analysis focused on admissions with a medical diagnosis related group and a secondary analysis focused on surgical admissions. PA catheterization was identified by 5 International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision procedure codes describing PA or wedge-pressure monitoring, measurement of mixed venous blood gases, or monitoring of cardiac output by oxygen consumption or other technique. Annual PA catheterization use per 1000 medical admissions. Between 1993 and 2004, PA catheterization use decreased by 65% from 5.66 to 1.99 per 1000 medical admissions (risk ratio [RR], 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-0.42). Among patients who died during hospitalization, a group whose disease severity may be consistent across time, the relative decline was similar, decreasing from 54.7 to 18.1 per 1000 deaths (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.28-0.38). A significant change in trend occurred following a 1996 study that suggested increased mortality with PA catheterization. The decline in utilization was similar in surgical patients (RR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.25-0.49). Among common diagnoses associated with PA catheterization, the decline was most prominent for myocardial infarction, which decreased by 81% (RR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.15-0.23), and least prominent for septicemia, which decreased by 54% (RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.38-0.54). Sensitivity analyses suggested findings were not due to artifact of changing procedure coding practice. Use of the PA catheter, previously a hallmark of critical care practice, has decreased in the United States during the last decade, possibly due to growing evidence that this invasive procedure does not reduce mortality.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The pediatrics milestones: conceptual framework, guiding principles, and approach to development.

            The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP) have partnered to initiate the Pediatrics Milestone Project to further refine the 6 ACGME competencies and to set performance standards as part of the continued commitment to document outcomes of training and program effectiveness. Members of the Pediatrics Milestone Project Working Group searched the medical literature and beyond to create a synopsis of models and evidence for a developmental ontogeny of the elements for 52 subcompetencies. For each subcompetency, we created a series of Milestones, grounded in the literature. The milestones were vetted with the entire working group, engaging in an iterative process of revisions until reaching consensus that their narrative descriptions (1) included all critical elements, (2) were behaviorally based, (3) were properly sequenced, and (4) represented the educational continuum of training and practice. We have completed the first iteration of milestones for all subcompetencies. For each milestone, a synopsis of relevant literature provides background, references, and a conceptual framework. These milestones provide narrative descriptions of behaviors that represent the ontogeny of knowledge, skill, and attitude development across the educational continuum of training and practice. The pediatrics milestones take us a step closer to meaningful outcome assessment. Next steps include undertaking rigorous study, making appropriate modifications, and setting performance standards. Our aim is to assist program directors in making more reliable and valid judgments as to whether a resident is a "good doctor" and to provide outcome evidence regarding the program's success in developing doctors.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Competency-based education and training in internal medicine.

              Recent efforts to improve medical education include adopting a new framework based on 6 broad competencies defined by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. In this article, the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine Education Redesign Task Force II examines the advantages and challenges of a competency-based educational framework for medical residents. Efforts to refine specific competencies by developing detailed milestones are described, and examples of training program initiatives using a competency-based approach are presented. Meeting the challenges of a competency-based framework and supporting these educational innovations require a robust faculty development program. Challenges to competency-based education include teaching and evaluating the competencies related to practice-based learning and improvement and systems-based practice, as well as implementing a flexible time frame to achieve competencies. However, the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine Education Redesign Task Force II does not favor reducing internal medicine training to less than 36 months as part of competency-based education. Rather, the 36-month time frame should allow for remediation to address deficiencies in achieving competencies and for diverse enrichment experiences in such areas as quality of care and practice improvement for residents who have demonstrated skills in all required competencies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                24945874
                10.1378/chest.14-0710

                Comments

                Comment on this article