Exclusion of Residents From Surgery-Intensive Care Team Communication: A Qualitative Study

Intraprofessional workplace learning in postgraduate medical education: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Residents need to be trained across the boundaries of their own specialty to prepare them for collaborative practice. Intraprofessional learning (i.e. between individuals of different disciplines within the same profession) has received little attention in the postgraduate medical education literature, in contrast to the extensive literature on interprofessional learning between individuals of different professions. To address this gap, we performed a scoping review to investigate what and how residents learn from workplace-related intraprofessional activities, and what factors influence learning.

METHODS

The PRISMA guidelines were used to conduct a scoping review of empirical studies on intraprofessional workplace learning in postgraduate medical education published between 1 January 2000 to 16 April 2020 in Pubmed, Embase, PsycINFO, ERIC and Web of Science. This study applied 'best fit' framework-based synthesis to map the existing evidence, using the presage-process-product (3P) model developed by Tynjälä (2013).

RESULTS

Four thousand three hundred thirty records were screened, and 37 articles were included. This review identified influencing (presage) factors that derived from the sociocultural environment, learner and learning context. Studies described that complexity of care can both facilitate and hinder learning. Furthermore, intraprofessional learning is threatened by professional stereotyping and negative perceptions, and awareness of learning opportunities and explicit reflection are critical in intraprofessional workplace learning. Studies described a range of informal and formal intraprofessional activities (process) under the headings of collaboration in clinical practice, rotations or placements, formal educational sessions and simulated workplace training. In general, learners responded well and their attitudes and perceptions improved, learners reported increased knowledge and skills and positive behavioural changes (product). Learning outcomes were reported in the domains of patient-centred care, collaborative attitudes and respect, mutual knowledge and understanding, collaborative decision making, communication, leadership, teamwork and reflexivity.

CONCLUSIONS

This review gives insight into the high learning potential of intraprofessional activities. Many of the included studies relied on self-reported perceptions of change, therefore, future research should focus on generating more robust evidence including objectively examined outcome measures. This review offers a comprehensive overview of the factors that influence intraprofessional workplace learning in postgraduate medical education. Finally, we provide recommendations for enhancing intraprofessional learning in clinical practice.

"Who wants me to do what?" varied expectations from key stakeholder groups in the surgical intensive care unit creates a challenging learning environment

BACKGROUND

Surgical intensive care units (SICU) require complex care from a multi-disciplinary team. Frequent changes in team members can lead to shifting expectations for junior general surgical trainees, which creates a challenging working and learning environment. We aim to identify expectations of junior surgery trainee's medical knowledge and technical/non-technical skills at the start of their SICU rotation. We hypothesize that expectations will not be consistent across SICU stakeholder groups.

METHODS

Twenty-eight individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with six SICU stakeholder groups at a medium-sized academic hospital. Expectations were identified from interview transcripts. Frequency counts were analyzed.

RESULTS

Forty-one expectations were identified. 4 expectations were identified by a majority of interviewees. Most expectations were identified by 7 or fewer interviewees. 23 (53%) expectations were shared by at least one stakeholder group. 2 (8%) expectations were shared by all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SICU stakeholder groups identified ten medical knowledge, ten technical skill, and three non-technical skill expectations. Yet, few expectations were shared among the groups. Thus, SICU stakeholder groups have disparate expectations for surgery trainees in our SICU.

How to communicate between surgeon and intensivist?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Communication and teamwork are essential to enhance the quality of care, especially in operating rooms and ICUs. In these settings, the effective interprofessional collaboration between surgeons and intensivists impacts patients' outcome. This review discusses current opinions and evidence for improving communication strategies and the relationship between surgeons and intensivists/anesthesiologist.

RECENT FINDINGS

Effective teamwork has been demonstrated to improve patient outcome and foster healthier relationships between professionals.With the expansion of new medical superspecialist disciplines and the latest medical developments, patient care has been put through a progressive fragmentation, rather than a holistic approach. Operating theaters and ICU are the common fields where surgeons and anesthesiologists/intensivists work. However, communication challenges may frequently arise. Therefore, effective communication, relational coordination, and team situation awareness are considered to affect quality of teamwork in three different phases of the patient-centered care process: preoperatively, intraoperatively, and postoperatively.

SUMMARY

Although limited, current evidence suggests to improve communication and teamwork in patient perioperative care. Further research is needed to strengthen the surgeon-intensivist relationship and to deliver high-quality patient care.

Can Residents Be Trained and Safety Maintained?

INTRODUCTION

Teaching hospitals and faculty need to balance the educational mission for training residents with patient safety. There are no data studying the change in trauma patient outcomes before and after implementation of a surgical residency. The objective of this study was to compare trauma center outcomes before and after the advent of a surgical training program. We predicted that patient-centric outcome metrics would not be affected by the integration of surgical residents into trauma patient care.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed using the Crimson Continuum of Care (CCC) dataset and the Trauma Injury Severity Scores (TRISS) for the year before implementation of a surgical residency, compared to the 6 months following initiation of the residency. Severity and risk-adjusted performance measures included mortality, readmissions, complications, and length of stay. Using TRISS, actual, and predicted mortality was compared.

RESULTS

There were 1535 trauma admissions to the acute Care Trauma Service the year before starting the residency, and 856 admissions for the 6 months following the implementation of the program. The demographics were similar between the 2 groups. There was no clinically significant difference in observed mortality after the initiation of a surgery residency, based on CCC dataset variables and TRISS datasets. There were also no significant differences in complications and readmission rates.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that initiating a surgical training program did not affect mortality rates or complications of trauma patients. Training of general surgery residents in a high-performing trauma center can be effectively implemented without compromising patient safety.