A competency framework in cardiothoracic surgery for training and revalidation - an international comparison.
ABSTRACT The conventional methods of education, certification and recertification in cardiothoracic surgery face a paradigm shift in line with recent innovations in diagnostics and therapeutics. The attributes of a competent clinician entail proficiency in knowledge, communication, teamwork, management, health advocacy, professionalism and technical skills. This article investigates the skills required for a cardiothoracic surgeon to be competent. The relevant practice of certification and recertification across various regions has also been explored. Validated and competency-based curricula should be designed to develop core competencies to successfully integrate them into practice. Challenges to the implementation of such curricula and potential solutions are explored. Patient safety remains the ultimate aim to ensure excellence of both competency and performance.
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background: Research has demonstrated equivalent patient safety outcomes for various cardiac procedures when the primary surgeon was a supervised trainee. However, cardiac surgery cases have become more complex, and the Canadian cardiac surgery education model has undergone some changes. We sought to compare patient safety and efficiency of aortic valve replacement (AVR) between Canadian patients treated by senior cardiac trainees and those treated by certified cardiac surgeons. Methods: We completed a single-centre, case-matched, prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed study of AVR. Patients were matched between trainees and consultants for age, sex, New York Heart Association and Canadian Cardiovascular Society status, urgency of operation and diabetes status. Results:We analyzed 1102 procedures: 624 isolated AVRs and 478 AVRs with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). For isolated AVR, there was no significant difference in 30-d mortality (p = 0.13) or in major adverse events (p = 0.38) between the groups. In the AVR+CABG group, there was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (p = 0.10) or in the rates of major adverse events (p = 0.37) between the groups. Secondary outcomes (hospital and intensive care unit lengths of stay, valve size and type) did not differ significantly between the groups for isolated AVR or AVR+CABG. Conclusion: Despite a higher-risk patient population and changes in the cardiac surgery training model, it appears that outcomes are not negatively affected when a senior trainee acts as the primary surgeon in cases of AVR.Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie 04/2013; 56(2):033111-33111. · 1.63 Impact Factor