While the goal of the program was not to shorten training per se, efficiencies gained through a modular, competency-based program have resulted in shortened time to completion of residency training for some learners.

Background: Assessing residents' understanding and application of the 6 intrinsic CanMEDS roles (communicator, professional, manager, collaborator, health advocate, scholar) is challenging for postgraduate medical educators. We hypothesized that an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) designed to assess multiple intrinsic CanMEDS roles would be sufficiently reliable and valid. Methods:The OSCE comprised 6 10-minute stations, each testing 2 intrinsic roles using case-based scenarios (with or without the use of standardized patients). Residents were evaluated using 5-point scales and an overall performance rating at each station. Concurrent validity was sought by correlation with in-training evaluation reports (ITERs) from the last 12 months and an ordinal ranking created by program directors (PDs).Results: Twenty-five residents from postgraduate years (PGY) 0, 3 and 5 participated. The interstation reliability for total test scores (percent) was 0.87, while reliability for each of the communicator, collaborator, manager and professional roles was greater than 0.8. Total test scores, individual station scores and individual CanMEDS role scores all showed a significant effect by PGY level. Analysis of the PD rankings of intrinsic roles demonstrated a high correlation with the OSCE role scores. A correlation was seen between ITER and OSCE for the communicator role, while the ITER medical expert and total scores highly correlated with the communicator, manager and professional OSCE scores. Conclusion:An OSCE designed to assess the intrinsic CanMEDS roles was sufficiently valid and reliable for regular use in an orthopedic residency program.Contexte : Évaluer la compréhension et l'application des 6 rôles intrinsèques Can-MEDS (communicateur, professionnel, gestionnaire, collaborateur, promoteur de la santé, érudit) chez les résidents pose un défi pour les responsables de la formation médi-cale postdoctorale. Nous avons émis l'hypothèse selon laquelle un examen clinique objectif structuré (ECOS) conçu pour évaluer plusieurs rôles CanMEDS intrinsèques serait suffisamment fiable et valide.Méthodes : L'ECOS comportait 6 stations de 10 minutes, permettant chacune d'évaluer 2 rôles intrinsèques à l'aide de scénarios basés sur des cas (avec ou sans recours à des patients standardisés). Les résidents ont été notés au moyen d'échelles en 5 points et d'une évaluation globale de leur rendement à chacune des stations. La validité convergente a été vérifiée par corrélation avec les rapports d'évaluation en cours de formation (RÉF) des 12 mois précédents et un classement chiffré créé par les directeurs du programme (DP).Résultats: Vingt-cinq résidents des années 0, 3 et 5 y ont participé. La fiabilité interstation pour les scores totaux aux tests (en pourcentage) a été de 0,87, tandis que la fiabilité pour chacun des rôles de communicateur, collaborateur, gestionnaire et professionnel, a été supérieure à 0,8. Les scores totaux aux tests, les scores aux stations individuelles et les scores pour les rôles CanMEDS indivi...

The potential impact of resident duty hour restrictions on faculty is likely significant; however, the extent of this impact has still not been well documented. We undertook a narrative review of the literature to determine the magnitude of that potential impact and the nature of the evolving discourse related to faculty members as individuals. The literature provides an inconsistent picture of the impact of duty hour restrictions on faculty. While some studies have reported a significant increase in faculty workload, others suggest that the impact of duty hour restrictions has been minimal. Some papers suggest that duty hour restrictions may fundamentally change the nature of resident–teacher interactions and, as a result, will necessitate significant changes to the way education is delivered. Overall, the majority of issues of concern relate to one of the following: volume and composition of work, impact on faculty career choice, evolving perceptions of residents as learners, and the need to find an appropriate balance between learning and the quality and quantity of patient care. In describing these themes we identify some potential solutions and future directions for reconciling duty hour restrictions with faculty perceptions, anxieties, and desired outcomes.

Introduction: The MSPR is a Canada wide tool that provides aggregate information on MD students’ performance during training and used widely as part of PG admissions. This survey study elicits the perceptions of PG admissions stakeholders on the current use and future utility of the MSPR in Canada. Methods: PG admissions stakeholders across the faculties of medicine were convenience sampled for a 15-question online survey in the fall of 2018. Participants were asked how and when the MSPR is incorporated into the admissions process and perceptions and recommendations for improvement Data are summarized descriptively and thematically. Results: Responses came from 164 participants across the 17 faculties of medicine. The MSPR was widely used (92%), most commonly in the file review process (52%) for professionalism issues. The majority of responses indicated that MSPRs were not fair for all MD students (60%) and required revision (74%) with greater emphasis required on transparency, professionalism, and narrative comments. Discussion: The results indicate that though MSPRs are widely used in PG admissions their perceived value is limited to a few specific sources of information and to specific parts of the admissions process. There are significant concerns from PG stakeholders on the utility of MSPRs and future changes should align with the needs of these stakeholders while balancing the concerns of students and undergraduate programs.

No abstract