The UK proposals for revalidation of physicians: Implications for the recertification of surgeons

National programmes for validating physician competence and fitness for practice: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To explore and categorise the state of existing literature for national programmes designed to affirm or establish the continuing competence of physicians.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, ERIC, Sociological Abstracts, web/grey literature (2000-2014).

SELECTION

Included when a record described a (1) national-level physician validation system, (2) recognised as a system for affirming competence and (3) reported relevant data.

DATA EXTRACTION

Using bibliographic software, title and abstracts were reviewed using an assessment matrix to ensure duplicate, paired screening. Dyads included both a methodologist and content expert on each assessment, reflective of evidence-informed best practices to decrease errors.

RESULTS

45 reports were included. Publication dates ranged from 2002 to 2014 with the majority of publications occurring in the previous six years (n=35). Country of origin--defined as that of the primary author--included the USA (N=32), the UK (N=8), Canada (N=3), Kuwait (N=1) and Australia (N=1). Three broad themes emerged from this heterogeneous data set: contemporary national programmes, contextual factors and terminological consistency. Four national physician validation systems emerged from the data: the American Board of Medical Specialties Maintenance of Certification Program, the Federation of State Medical Boards Maintenance of Licensure Program, the Canadian Revalidation Program and the UK Revalidation Program. Three contextual factors emerged as stimuli for the implementation of national validation systems: medical regulation, quality of care and professional competence. Finally, great variation among the definitions of key terms was identified.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an emerging literature focusing on national physician validation systems. Four major systems have been implemented in recent years and it is anticipated that more will follow. Much of this work is descriptive, and gaps exist for the extent to which systems build on current evidence or theory. Terminology is highly variable across programmes for validating physician competence and fitness for practice.

Competence assurance - who cares?

The provision of clinical care in the United Kingdom now requires the acquisition of a licence to practise from the regulatory authority. A review process-revalidation has been put in place to ensure that standards of care are maintained by the medical workforce, and that all doctors remain up-to-date and fit for purpose so that this licence can be retained. This article outlines how this new statutory requirement pertains to paediatric surgery and highlights those areas where adjudication of competence remains imprecise and where progress in this process of revalidation needs to be made.

Safety of training and assessment in operating theatres--a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Procedural outcomes can be used to assess the performance of specialists and trainees. This article establishes a systematic evidence base for the safety of training in the operating theatre. It also explores the possibility of using early, intermediate and late procedural outcomes of cardiac surgical operations to evaluate the performance of the clinicians and the healthcare system.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE and PsycINFO databases were searched. Comparative studies evaluating quality indicators of cardiac surgical procedures (coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and valve surgery) were included. guidelines from the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) were used.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. For CABG, meta-analysis of outcomes did not show any significant differences between the technical and non-technical skills of trainees versus specialists apart from bypass time (less for specialists) and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (less for trainees). Studies reporting outcomes on valve surgery also did not report any statistically significant differences amongst the outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review did not discern any significant differences between the procedural outcomes of trainees and specialists, which indicates that trainees are safe to operate under senior supervision. In addition, this article recommends that various procedural outcomes can be used to evaluate the performance of clinicians and healthcare systems. Prospective studies need to be performed, taking into account the specific contribution of trainees and specialists during the procedure. This will give a clearer indication of safety and performance of trainees and specialists in the operating theatre.

Observational teamwork assessment for surgery: feasibility of clinical and nonclinical assessor calibration with short-term training

OBJECTIVES

To assess the feasibility of training clinical and nonclinical novice assessors to rate teamwork behavior in the operating room with short-term structured training using the observational teamwork assessment for surgery (OTAS) tool.

BACKGROUND

Effective teamwork is fundamental to the delivery of optimal patient care in the operating room (OR). OTAS provides a comprehensive and robust measure of teamwork in surgery. To date, assessors with a background in psychology/human factors have been shown to be able to use OTAS reliably after training. However, the feasibility of observer training over a short timescale and accessibility to the wider clinical community (ie, OTAS use by clinicians) are yet to be empirically demonstrated.

METHODS

Ten general surgery cases were observed and assessed using OTAS in real-time by an expert in rating OTAS behaviors (100+ cases rated) and 4 novices: 2 psychologists and 2 surgeons. Assessors were blinded to each other's scores during observations. After each observation, scores were compared and discussed between expert and novice assessors in a debriefing session.

RESULTS

All novices were reliable with the expert to a acceptable degree at rating all OTAS behaviors by the end of training (intraclass correlation coefficients ≥0.68). For 3 of the 5 behaviors (communication, cooperation, and leadership), calibration improved most rapidly across the first 7 observed cases. For monitoring/situational awareness, calibration improved steadily across the 10 observed cases. For coordination, no significant improvement in calibration over time was observed because of high interrater reliability from the outset (ie, a ceiling effect). There was no significant difference between surgeons and psychologists in their calibration with the expert.

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible to train both clinicians and nonclinicians to use OTAS to assess teamwork behaviors in ORs over a short structured training period. OTAS is an accessible tool that can be used robustly (ie, reliably) by assessors from both clinical and nonclinical backgrounds.