Intensive care medicine: a multidisciplinary competence-based approach

Anaesthesia training designs across Europe: A survey-based study from the trainees committee of the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care

BACKGROUND

Anaesthesiology training programs in Europe vary in duration, content, and requirements for completion. This survey-based study conducted by the Trainees Committee of the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care explores current anaesthesia training designs across Europe.

METHODS

Between May and July 2018, we sent a 41-item online questionnaire to all National Trainee Representatives, members of the National Anaesthesiologists Societies Committee, and Council Representatives of the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) of all member countries. We cross-validated inconsistent data with different country representatives.

RESULTS

Forty-three anaesthesiologists from all 39 associated ESAIC countries completed the questionnaire. Results showed considerable variability in teaching formats, frequency of teaching sessions during training, and differences in assessments made during and at the end of training. The reported duration of training was 60 months in 59% (n = 23) of participating countries, ranging from 24 months in Russia and Ukraine to 84 months in the UK.

CONCLUSION

This study shows the significant differences in anaesthesiology training formats across Europe, and highlights the importance of developing standardised training programs to ensure a consistent level of training and to improve patient safety. This study provides valuable insights into European anaesthesia training, and underlines the need for further research and collaboration to improve requirements.

Intensive care medicine in Europe: perspectives from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care

BACKGROUND

Anaesthesiology represents a rapidly evolving medical specialty in global healthcare, currently covering advanced peri-operative, pre-hospital and in-hospital critical emergency management (CREM), intensive care medicine (ICM) and pain management. The aim of the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) is to develop and promote a coordinated interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary European network of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (AICM) societies for improvement of patient safety and outcome, and to enhance political and public awareness of the role of anaesthesiologists all over Europe. The ESAIC promotes coordinated interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary care for severely compromised patients, based on the European training requirements (ETR) within the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS).

METHODS

To define the current situation of AICM in Europe, a survey was sent in April 2019 to the ESAIC Council and the ESAIC National Anaesthesiologists Societies Committee (NASC) members. The survey posed questions regarding the year of foundation, the inclusion of ICM in the society name, and if, and to what extent, various kinds (postoperative, general, specific, mixed) of national ICUs are being run by differing medical specialties. The study data were compiled and analysed by the ESAIC Board, Council and NASC in December 2019.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Amongst the 42 European national societies surveyed (41 members of ESAIC-NASC plus Luxembourg), nineteen (45%) also include terms related to critical care medicine or ICM in their names, seven (17%) include terms related to reanimation and three (7%) to resuscitation. In recent years, several national societies revised their names to better reflect their gradual embrace of peri-operative medicine, ICM, CREM and pain management. Approximately 70% of ICU beds in Europe, and 100% in Scandinavia, are being run by anaesthesiologists, the remaining 30% being managed by physicians from other surgical or medical specialties. To emphasise future needs and resources of European AICM, the ESAIC drafted an ICM roadmap in terms of clinical practice, organisation of healthcare, interprofessional and interdisciplinary collaboration, patient safety, outcome and empowerment, professional working conditions, and changes in research, teaching and training required to meet future challenges and expectations.