Search

The 2019 CSIM national meeting included a workshop focused on current topics related to medical education across Canada. The workshop topics included leadership in education, teaching point of care ultrasound, teaching clinical reasoning, and using competency based medical education to design a maintenance of competency program for practicing specialists. This article reflects the experience and discussions from the session, with the goal of stimulating national conversations and collaborations betweenCSIM members.

Background Team-based learning (TBL) promotes problem solving and teamwork, and has been applied as an instructional method in undergraduate medical education with purported benefits. Although TBL curricula have been implemented for residents, no published systematic reviews or guidelines exist for the development and use of TBL in graduate medical education (GME). Objective To review TBL curricula in GME, identify gaps in the literature, and synthesize a framework to guide the development of TBL curricula at the GME level. Methods We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, and ERIC databases from 1990 to 2014 for relevant articles. References were reviewed to identify additional studies. The inclusion criteria were peer-reviewed publications in English that described TBL curriculum implementation in GME. Data were systematically abstracted and reviewed for consensus. Based on included publications, a 4-element framework—system, residents, significance, and scaffolding—was developed to serve as a step-wise guide to planning a TBL curriculum in GME. Results Nine publications describing 7 unique TBL curricula in residency met inclusion criteria. Outcomes included feasibility, satisfaction, clinical behavior, teamwork, and knowledge application. Conclusions TBL appears feasible in the GME environment, with learner reactions ranging from positive to neutral. Gaps in the literature occur within each of the 4 elements of the suggested framework, including: system, faculty preparation time and minimum length of effective TBL sessions; residents, impact of team heterogeneity and inconsistent attendance; significance, comparison to other instructional methods and outcomes measuring knowledge retention, knowledge application, and skill development; and scaffolding, factors that influence the completion of preparatory work.

Background: Choosing Wisely Canada is a campaign that fosters conversations between physicians and patients about high-value health care. However, little is known about physicians’ readiness to have these conversations. Our objective was to determine how ready practising internists were to embrace and openly address high-value care during conversations with patients or their families. Methods: Practising internists in hospitals affiliated with McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, were invited to complete an electronic survey with 3 clinical scenarios: each had 3 low-value interventions that had been requested by the patient or family member. For each request, participants chose 1 of 3 statements reflecting how they would respond: a low-value statement agreeing to provide the intervention, an implicit high-value statement declining to provide the intervention without mentioning value or an explicit high-value statement declining to provide the intervention with mention of value. Results: Forty-four of 62 eligible physicians (71.0% response rate) participated in the survey. High-value statements were selected in 91% of cases. The implicit high-value statement was chosen more often than the explicit high-value statement (65.7% v. 25.5% of all responses, respectively; χ2 range 4.46–56.23, p < 0.05). Interpretation: Physicians favoured high-value care but frequently chose not to explicitly address value in their statements. Physicians seemed ready to embrace high-value health care practice, although they were not ready to openly discuss it with patients and their families.

Objective Advance care planning (ACP) can result in end-of-life care that is more congruent with patients’ values and preferences. There is increasing interest in video decision aids to assist with ACP. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of video decision aids on patients’ preferences regarding life-sustaining treatments (primary outcome). Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, AMED and CENTRAL, between 1980 and February 2014, and correspondence with authors. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised controlled trials of adult patients that compared a video decision aid to a non-video-based intervention to assist with choices about use of life-sustaining treatments and reported at least one ACP-related outcome. Data extraction Reviewers worked independently and in pairs to screen potentially eligible articles, and to extract data regarding risk of bias, population, intervention, comparator and outcomes. Reviewers assessed quality of evidence (confidence in effect estimates) for each outcome using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Results 10 trials enrolling 2220 patients were included. Low-quality evidence suggests that patients who use a video decision aid are less likely to indicate a preference for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (pooled risk ratio, 0.50 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.95); I 2 =65%). Moderate-quality evidence suggests that video decision aids result in greater knowledge related to ACP (standardised mean difference, 0.58 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.77); I 2 =0%). No study reported on the congruence of end-of-life treatments with patients’ wishes. No study evaluated the effect of video decision aids when integrated into clinical care. Conclusions Video decision aids may improve some ACP-related outcomes. Before recommending their use in clinical practice, more evidence is needed to confirm these findings and to evaluate the impact of video decision aids when integrated into patient care.