Developing and Implementing a Quality Improvement Curriculum in a Large Internal Medicine Residency Program.

COUNTERPOINT: Should Interventional Pulmonology Be Given American Board of Internal Medicine Subspecialty Status? No

Mannequin-based simulation in graduate medical education has gained widespread acceptance. Its use in non-procedural training within internal medicine (IM) remains scant, possibly due to the logistical barriers to implementation of simulation curricula in large residency programs. We report the Massachusetts General Hospital Department of Medicine’s scale-up of a voluntary pilot program to a mandatory longitudinal simulation curriculum in a large IM residency program (n = 54). We utilized an eight-case curriculum implemented over the first four months of the academic year. An intensive care unit curriculum was piloted in the spring. In order to administer a comprehensive curriculum in a large residency program where faculty resources are limited, thirty second-year and third-year residents served as session facilitators and two senior residents served as chairpersons of the program. Post-session anonymous survey revealed high learner satisfaction scores for the mandatory program, similar to those of the voluntary pilot program. Most interns believed the sessions should continue to be mandatory. Utilizing residents as volunteer facilitators and program leaders allowed the implementation of a well-received mandatory simulation program in a large IM residency program and facilitated program sustainability.

Keywords: percutaneous coronary intervention; structural heart disease intervention; congential heart disease; adults; congenital heart disease; pediatrics

The Gastroenterology Core Curriculum, Third Edition

The Accreditation and Certification System After Next

A Systems Approach to Morbidity and Mortality Conference

Although there is an expectation for outcomes-oriented training in residency programs, the reality is that few guidelines and examples exist as to how to provide this type of education and training. We aimed to improve patient care outcomes in our pediatric residency program by using quality improvement (QI) methods, tools, and approaches. A series of QI projects were implemented over a 3-year period in a pediatric residency program to improve patient care outcomes and teach the residents how to use QI methods, tools, and approaches. Residents experienced practice-based learning and systems-based assessment through group projects and review of their own patient outcomes. Resident QI experiences were reviewed quarterly by the program director and were a mandatory part of resident training portfolios. Using QI methodology, we were able to improve management of children with obesity, to achieve high compliance with the national patient safety goals, improve the pediatric hotline service, and implement better patient flow in resident continuity clinic. Based on our experiences, we conclude that to successfully implement QI projects in residency programs, QI techniques must be formally taught, the opportunities for resident participation must be multiple and diverse, and QI outcomes should be incorporated in resident training and assessment so that they experience the benefits of the QI intervention. The lessons learned from our experiences, as well as the projects we describe, can be easily deployed and implemented in other residency programs.

Background: Although the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) certification is valued as a reflection of physicians’ experience, education, and expertise, limited methods exist to predict performance in the examination.Purpose: The objective of this study was to develop and validate a predictive tool based on variables common to all residency programs, regarding the probability of an internal medicine graduate passing the ABIM certification examination.Methods: The development cohort was obtained from the files of the Cleveland Clinic internal medicine residents who began training between 2004 and 2008. A multivariable logistic regression model was built to predict the ABIM passing rate. The model was represented as a nomogram, which was internally validated with bootstrap resamples. The external validation was done retrospectively on a cohort of residents who graduated from two other independent internal medicine residency programs between 2007 and 2011.Results: Of the 194 Cleveland Clinic graduates used for the nomogram development, 175 (90.2%) successfully passed the ABIM certification examination. The final nomogram included four predictors: In-Training Examination (ITE) scores in postgraduate year (PGY) 1, 2, and 3, and the number of months of overnight calls in the last 6 months of residency. The nomogram achieved a concordance index (CI) of 0.98 after correcting for over-fitting bias and allowed for the determination of an estimated probability of passing the ABIM exam. Of the 126 graduates from two other residency programs used for external validation, 116 (92.1%) passed the ABIM examination. The nomogram CI in the external validation cohort was 0.94, suggesting outstanding discrimination.Conclusions: A simple user-friendly predictive tool, based on readily available data, was developed to predict the probability of passing the ABIM exam for internal medicine residents. This may guide program directors’ decision-making related to program curriculum and advice given to individual residents regarding board preparation.

Longitudinal quality improvement curriculum for hematology/oncology fellows in an academic training program

Growing concern about rising costs and potential harms of medical care has stimulated interest in assessing physicians' ability to minimize the provision of unnecessary care. To assess whether graduates of residency programs characterized by low-intensity practice patterns are more capable of managing patients' care conservatively, when appropriate, and whether graduates of these programs are less capable of providing appropriately aggressive care. Cross-sectional comparison of 6639 first-time takers of the 2007 American Board of Internal Medicine certifying examination, aggregated by residency program (n = 357). Intensity of practice, measured using the End-of-Life Visit Index, which is the mean number of physician visits within the last 6 months of life among Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older in the residency program's hospital referral region. The mean score by program on the Appropriately Conservative Management (ACM) (and Appropriately Aggressive Management [AAM]) subscales, comprising all American Board of Internal Medicine certifying examination questions for which the correct response represented the least (or most, respectively) aggressive management strategy. Mean scores on the remainder of the examination were used to stratify programs into 4 knowledge tiers. Data were analyzed by linear regression of ACM (or AAM) scores on the End-of-Life Visit Index, stratified by knowledge tier. Within each knowledge tier, the lower the intensity of health care practice in the hospital referral region, the better residency program graduates scored on the ACM subscale (P < .001 for the linear trend in each tier). In knowledge tier 4 (poorest), for example, graduates of programs in the lowest-intensity regions had a mean ACM score in the 38th percentile compared with the 22nd percentile for programs in the highest-intensity regions; in tier 2, ACM scores ranged from the 75th to the 48th percentile in regions from lowest to highest intensity. Graduates of programs in low-intensity regions tended, more weakly, to score better on the AAM subscale (in 3 of 4 knowledge tiers). Regardless of overall medical knowledge, internists trained at programs in hospital referral regions with lower-intensity medical practice are more likely to recognize when conservative management is appropriate. These internists remain capable of choosing an aggressive approach when indicated.

We appreciate Glaser's comments regarding board certification affecting medical student interest in internal medicine. 1 While many senior students review residency program data regarding the passage of the American Board of Internal Medicine examination, we are not aware of students not choosing a career in internal medicine because of such concerns. Although the overall passage rate in 1993 was 54%, when you review the statistics looking at US and Canadian physicians taking the examination for the first time, the passage rate for 1993 is much higher, at 75%, and this rate has been consistently maintained over the years. 2 The American Board of Internal Medicine considers the examination for certification in internal medicine a standard of excellence rather than a standard of competence. Certainly, there are outstanding internists who have difficulty with certifying examinations that, unfortunately, may limit their practice opportunities. However, we do not believe that the examination statistics,

US internal medicine residency programs are now required to rate residents using milestones. Evidence of validity of milestone ratings is needed. To compare ratings of internal medicine residents using the pre-2015 resident annual evaluation summary (RAES), a nondevelopmental rating scale, with developmental milestone ratings. Cross-sectional study of US internal medicine residency programs in the 2013-2014 academic year, including 21 284 internal medicine residents (7048 postgraduate-year 1 [PGY-1], 7233 PGY-2, and 7003 PGY-3). Program director ratings on the RAES and milestone ratings. Correlations of RAES and milestone ratings by training year; correlations of medical knowledge ratings with American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) certification examination scores; rating of unprofessional behavior using the 2 systems. Corresponding RAES ratings and milestone ratings showed progressively higher correlations across training years, ranging among competencies from 0.31 (95% CI, 0.29 to 0.33) to 0.35 (95% CI, 0.33 to 0.37) for PGY-1 residents to 0.43 (95% CI, 0.41 to 0.45) to 0.52 (95% CI, 0.50 to 0.54) for PGY-3 residents (all P values <.05). Linear regression showed ratings differed more between PGY-1 and PGY-3 years using milestone ratings than the RAES (all P values <.001). Of the 6260 residents who attempted the certification examination, the 618 who failed had lower ratings using both systems for medical knowledge than did those who passed (RAES difference, -0.9; 95% CI, -1.0 to -0.8; P < .001; milestone medical knowledge 1 difference, -0.3; 95% CI, -0.3 to -0.3; P < .001; and medical knowledge 2 difference, -0.2; 95% CI, -0.3 to -0.2; P < .001). Of the 26 PGY-3 residents with milestone ratings indicating deficiencies on either of the 2 medical knowledge subcompetencies, 12 failed the certification examination. Correlation of RAES ratings for professionalism with residents' lowest professionalism milestone ratings was 0.44 (95% CI, 0.43 to 0.45; P < .001). Among US internal medicine residents in the 2013-2014 academic year, milestone-based ratings correlated with RAES ratings but with a greater difference across training years. Both rating systems for medical knowledge correlated with ABIM certification examination scores. Milestone ratings may better detect problems with professionalism. These preliminary findings may inform establishment of the validity of milestone-based assessment.

A Vision of the Platinum Rule

The American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) recognized that certification and recertification must be based on an assessment of performance in practice as well as an examination of medical knowledge. Physician self-assessment of practice performance is proposed as one method that certification boards may use to evaluate competence in practice-based learning and improvement and systems-based practice. Sixteen practicing general internists and endocrinologists with 10-year time-limited certification participated in a beta test of the ABIM's diabetes practice improvement module (PIM) as part of their recertification program. A PIM consists of a self-directed medical record audit, practice system survey, and patient survey. A quality improvement education specialist from the Connecticut Quality Improvement Organization provided on-site and distance consultation on quality improvement methods and tools. An independent audit assessed the reliability of physician self-audit. Qualitative interviews were conducted at 2 time points to assess for physician satisfaction and behavioral change in quality improvement. Fourteen physicians completed the diabetes PIM. All but 1 physician found the medical record audit to provide important information about the practice. Of the 11 physicians who completed a follow-up interview, 10 stated that the quality improvement education specialist helped improve their practice. Self-assessment using the ABIM diabetes PIM as part of recertification provides valuable practice information and can lead to meaningful behavioral change by physicians. Collaboration with an educator in quality improvement appears to facilitate the effects of the practice improvement module. Future work should investigate the effect on patient outcomes.

The common wisdom at the end of the 20th century was that the United States was training too many specialists, including cardiologists.1 By 2001, however, there was increasing evidence that the supply of cardiologists was not meeting the growing demand. That year, as president-elect of the American College of Cardiology (ACC), I appointed a task force to evaluate cardiology workforce. The task force undertook a 2-year process of literature review, hypothesis generation, research design, data acquisition, and analysis. This intense effort included a Bethesda Conference at which consensus was achieved on a report that will be published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology . Based on various types of information and data, the ACC task force concluded that the United States is facing a shortage of cardiologists. This will reduce access to specialty care of proven benefit and will undermine our nation’s vital cardiovascular research effort. The Bethesda Conference report includes 8 working group documents that recommend several short- and intermediate-term strategies to help narrow the growing demand-supply gap for cardiologists (see Table 1). Some recommendations can be implemented at a local practice or institution level. Others will require a series of complex and coordinated actions at a national level. Hopefully, the report will catalyze actions by academic medical centers, regulatory organizations, federal policymakers, professional societies, and others that influence the output of cardiovascular specialists. View this table: TABLE 1. Working Groups of the ACC Task Force on Workforce Several things continue to drive demand for cardiologists. Elsewhere, I have argued that various scientific, social, and demographic “demand catalysts” outweigh factors that might decrease demand for cardiologists during the next decade2 (see Table 2). Although the relative influence of each demand factor will change over time, one thing is certain: the cardiovascular disease burden in the United States …