First steps towards international competency goals for residency training: a qualitative comparison of 3 regional standards in anesthesiology
| dc.contributor.author | Buléon, Clément | |
| dc.contributor.author | Eng, Reuben | |
| dc.contributor.author | Rudolph, Jenny W. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Minehart, Rebecca D. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-11-14T01:02:25Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2021-11-14T01:02:25Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2021-11-10 | |
| dc.date.updated | 2021-11-14T01:02:24Z | |
| dc.description.abstract | Abstract Background Competency-based medical education (CBME) has revolutionized approaches to training by making expectations more concrete, visible, and relevant for trainees. Designing, applying, and updating CBME requirements challenges residency programs, which must address many aspects of training simultaneously. This challenge also exists for educational regulatory bodies in creating and adjusting national competencies to standardize training expectations. We propose that an international approach for mapping residency training requirements may provide a baseline for assessing commonalities and differences. This approach allows us to take our first steps towards creating international competency goals to enhance sharing of best practices in education and clinical work. Methods We chose anesthesiology residency training as our example discipline. Using two rounds of content analysis, we qualitatively compared published anesthesiology residency competencies for the European Union (The European Training Requirement), United States (ACGME Milestones), and Canada (CanMEDS Competence By Design), focusing on similarities and differences in representation (round one) and emphasis (round two) to generate hypotheses on practical solutions regarding international educational standards. Results We mapped the similarities and discrepancies between the three repositories. Round one revealed that 93% of competencies were common between the three repositories. Major differences between European Training Requirement, US Milestones, and Competence by Design competencies involved critical emergency medicine. Round two showed that over 30% of competencies were emphasized equally, with notable exceptions that European Training Requirement emphasized Anaesthesia Non-Technical Skills, Competence by Design highlighted more granular competencies within specific anesthesiology situations, and US Milestones emphasized professionalism and behavioral practices. Conclusions This qualitative comparison has identified commonalities and differences in anesthesiology training which may facilitate sharing broader perspectives on diverse high-quality educational, clinical, and research practices to enhance innovative approaches. Determining these overlaps in residency training can prompt international educational societies responsible for creating competencies to collaborate to design future training programs. This approach may be considered as a feasible method to build an international core of residency competency requirements for other disciplines. | |
| dc.identifier.citation | BMC Medical Education. 2021 Nov 10;21(1):569 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-03007-w | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1880/114113 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/43961 | |
| dc.language.rfc3066 | en | |
| dc.rights.holder | The Author(s) | |
| dc.title | First steps towards international competency goals for residency training: a qualitative comparison of 3 regional standards in anesthesiology | |
| dc.type | Journal Article |