Search

Background: Inflammation is a key mediator in the development and progression of the atherosclerotic disease process as well as its resultant complications, like myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and cardiovascular (CV) death, and is emerging as a novel treatment target. Trials involving anti-inflammatory medications have demonstrated outcome benefit in patients with known CV disease. In this regard, colchicine appears to hold great promise. However, there are potential drawbacks to colchicine use, as some studies have identified an increased risk of infection, and a non-significant trend for increased all-cause mortality. Thus, a more thorough understanding of the underlying mechanism of action of colchicine is needed to enable a better patient selection for this novel CV therapy., Objective: The primary objective of the Canadian Study of Arterial Inflammation in Patients with Diabetes and Recent Vascular Events, Evaluation of Colchicine Effectiveness (CADENCE) trial is to assess the effect of colchicine on vascular inflammation in the carotid arteries and ascending aorta measured with 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/CT in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) or pre-diabetes who have experienced a recent vascular event (acute coronary syndrome (ACS)/MI, transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or stroke). Secondary objectives include determining colchicine's effect on inflammatory biomarkers (high-sensitivity C reactive protein (hs-CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6)). Additionally, we will assess if baseline inflammation imaging or biomarkers are associated with a treatment response to colchicine determined by imaging. Exploratory objectives will look at: (1) the difference in the inflammatory response to colchicine in patients with coronary events compared with patients with cerebral events; (2) the difference in the inflammatory response to colchicine in different vascular beds; (3) the relationship of FDG-PET imaging markers with serum biomarkers and (4) assessment of quality-of-life changes., Methods and Design: CADENCE is a multicentre, prospective, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study to determine the effect of colchicine on arterial inflammation as assessed with imaging and circulatory biomarkers, specifically carotid arteries and aortic FDG uptake as well as hs-CRP and IL-6 among others. Patients with T2DM or pre-diabetes who have recently experienced a CV event (within 30-120 days after an ACS (ie, ST-elevation MI (STEMI) or non-STEMI)) or TIA/stroke with documented large vessel atherosclerotic disease will be randomised to treatment with either colchicine 0.6 mg oral daily or placebo. Participants will undergo baseline clinical evaluation including EQ5D assessment, blood work for inflammatory markers and FDG PET/CT scan of the ascending aorta and left and right carotid arteries. Patients will undergo treatment for 6 months and have repeat clinical evaluation including EQ5D assessment, blood work for inflammatory markers and FDG PET/CT scan at the conclusion of the study. The primary outcome will be the change in the maximum target to background ratio (TBR max ) in the ascending aorta (or carotid arteries) from baseline to follow-up on FDG PET/CT imaging., Discussion: Colchicine is an exciting potential new therapy for CV risk reduction. However, its use is associated with side effects and greater understanding of its underlying mechanism of action is needed. Importantly, the current study will determine whether its anti-inflammatory action is an indirect systemic effect, or a more local plaque action that decreases inflammation. The results will also help identify patients who will benefit most from such therapy., Trial Registration Number: NCT04181996., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RB receives or has received honoraria from, and leads grants supported by GE Healthcare, Jubilant DraxImage and Lantheus Medical Grants. These are not related to the current work. RdK receives royalties from rubidium-82 PET technologies licensed to Jubilant Radiopharma and to INVIA Medical Solutions. He has also received research funding and honoraria from Jubilant Radiopharma and IONETIX. Otherwise, the authors declare that they have no competing interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: To examine the extent, range, and nature of how competency-based medical education (CBME) implementation terminology is used (i.e., the conceptualization of CBME-related terms) within the family medicine postgraduate medical education (PGME) and continuing professional development (CPD) literature., Method: This scoping review's methodology was based on Arksey and O'Malley's framework and subsequent recommendations by Tricco and colleagues. The authors searched 5 databases and the gray literature for U.S. and Canadian publications between January 2000 and April 2017. Full-text English-language articles on CBME implementation that focused exclusively on family medicine PGME and/or CPD programs were eligible for inclusion. A standardized data extraction form was used to collect article demographic data and coding concepts data. Data analysis used mixed methods, including quantitative frequency analysis and qualitative thematic analysis., Results: Of 470 unique articles identified, 80 (17%) met the inclusion criteria and were selected for inclusion in the review. Only 12 (15%) of the 80 articles provided a referenced definition of the coding concepts (i.e., referred to an article/organization as the definition's source), resulting in 19 highly variable-and 12 unique- referenced definitions of key terms used in CBME implementation (competence, competency, competency-based medical education). Thematic analysis of the referenced definitions identified 15 dominant themes, among which the most common were (1) a multidimensional and dynamic concept that encompasses a variety of skill components and (2) being able to use communication, knowledge, technical skills, clinical reasoning, judgment, emotions, attitudes, personal values, and reflection in practice., Conclusions: The construction and dissemination of shared definitions is essential to CBME's successful implementation. The low number of referenced definitions and lack of consensus on such definitions suggest more attention needs to be paid to conceptual rigor. The authors recommend those involved in family medicine education work with colleagues across medical specialties to develop a common taxonomy.

Purpose: Assessing students' professionalism is a critical component of medical education. Nonetheless, faculty reluctance to report professionalism lapses remains a significant barrier to the effective identification, management, and remediation of such lapses. The authors gathered information from faculty who supervise medical students to better understand their perceived barriers to reporting., Method: In 2015-2016, data were collected using a group concept mapping methodology, which is an innovative, asynchronous, structured mixed-methods approach using qualitative and quantitative measures to identify themes characterizing faculty reluctance to report professionalism lapses. Participants from four U.S. and Canadian medical schools brainstormed, sorted, and rated statements about perceived barriers to reporting. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analyses were used to analyze these data., Results: Of 431 physicians invited, 184 con-tributed to the brainstorming task (42.7%), 48 completed the sorting task (11.1%), and 83 completed the rating task (19.3%). Participants identified six barriers or themes to reporting lapses. The themes "uncertainty about the process," "ambiguity about the 'facts,'" "effects on the learner," and "time constraints" were rated highest as perceived barriers. Demographic subgroup analysis by gender, years of experience supervising medical students, years since graduation, and practice discipline revealed no significant differences (P > .05)., Conclusions: The decision to report medical students' professionalism lapses is more complex and nuanced than a binary choice to report or not. Faculty face challenges at the systems level and individual level. The themes identified in this study can be used for faculty development and to improve processes for reporting students' professionalism lapses.

Background: Accrediting bodies now recognize the importance of developing the professionalism competency, by setting standards that require medical schools to identify where professionalism is addressed and how it is evaluated within the formal curriculum. The objective of this study was to compare how professionalism competency is formally addressed in the curricula of Canadian medical schools, and to better understand the Canadian approach to reporting and remediation of lapses., Methods: A literature review was performed and with the input of the AFMC(Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada) Professionalism group, questionnaires were generated. An electronic survey was circulated to key leaders across the country at all the medical schools. In-depth telephone interviews were used to further explore themes, and a subsequent focus group was held to discuss challenges, particularly related to reporting and remediation., Results: The preponderance of formal professionalism teaching remains in the form of lectures and small group sessions in the preclinical years. Formal teaching declines significantly in the clerkship/clinical years. Evaluation is usually performed by a clinical supervisor, but OSCE, portfolio, and concern notes are increasingly used. Role modeling is heavily relied upon in clinical years, suggesting faculty training can help ensure clinical teachers recognize their influence on trainees. Formal remediation strategies are in place at most schools, and often involve essay writing, reflection exercises, or completion of learning modules about professionalism. Lack of clarity on what defines a lapse and fear of reprisal (for both trainees and faculty) limits reporting., Conclusions: This study provides an overview of how professional identity formation is supported in the Canadian context, guided by the standards set out by CanMEDS. Despite a rich literature that describes the definition, program design and evaluation methods for professionalism, in some areas of the curriculum there is still an opportunity to ensure programs embrace the suggested framework. Examples of teaching and evaluation methods, deficiencies in the clinical years of study (clerkship) and challenges in addressing lapses and organizational structure are identified. The results help identify the gaps that need to be addressed and some solutions that can be modeled at other academic institutions.