Rheumatology Milestones 2.0: A Roadmap for Competency-Based Medical Training of Rheumatology Fellows in the 21st Century

OBJECTIVE

Since 2014, rheumatology fellows have been assessed not only based on their ability to provide patient care and possession of medical knowledge but also on their skill in serving as patient advocates, navigators of health systems, and members of a health care team. Such assessments have been carried out through the use of competency-based milestones from the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME). However, a needs assessment has demonstrated interest in more context validity and subspecialty relevance since the development of the ACGME internal medicine (IM) subspecialty reporting milestones. The ACGME thus created a milestones working group, and the present study was undertaken to develop Rheumatology Milestones 2.0 as well as a supplemental guide to assist with implementation.

METHODS

The working group, consisting of 7 rheumatology program directors, 2 division directors, a community practice rheumatologist, a rheumatology fellow in training, and a public member who is a rheumatology patient, was overseen by the ACGME vice president for milestones development and met through three 12-hour, in-person meetings to compose the rheumatology specialty milestones and supplemental guide within the ACGME Milestones 2.0 project.

RESULTS

Informed by the needs assessment data and stakeholders, the working group revised and adapted the ACGME IM subspecialty reporting milestones to create a rheumatology-specific set of milestones and a supplemental guide for their implementation.

CONCLUSION

The Rheumatology Milestones 2.0 provides a specialty-specific, competency-based evaluation tool that can be used by program directors, clinical competency committees, and others to assess the competencies of rheumatology fellows during training and help measure readiness for independent practice.

What skills should new internal medicine interns have in july? A national survey of internal medicine residency program directors

PROBLEM

The transition from medical student to intern may cause stress and burnout in new interns and the delivery of suboptimal patient care. Despite a formal set of subinternship curriculum guidelines, program directors have expressed concern regarding the skill set of new interns and the lack of standardization in that skill set among interns from different medical schools. To address these issues, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's Next Accreditation System focuses on the development of a competency-based education continuum spanning undergraduate, graduate, and continuing medical education.

APPROACH

In 2010, the Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine subinternship task force, in collaboration with the Association of Program Directors in Internal Medicine survey committee, surveyed internal medicine residency program directors to determine which competencies or skills they expected from new medical school graduates. The authors summarized the results using categories of interest.

OUTCOMES

In both an item rank list and free-text responses, program directors were nearly uniform in ranking the skills they deemed most important for new interns-organization and time management and prioritization skills; effective communication skills; basic clinical skills; and knowing when to ask for assistance.

NEXT STEPS

Stakeholders should use the results of this survey as they develop a milestone-based curriculum for the fourth year of medical school and for the internal medicine subinternship. By doing so, they should develop a standardized set of skills that meet program directors' expectations, reduce the stress of transitions across the educational continuum, and improve the quality of patient care.

Osteonecrosis complicating highly active antiretroviral therapy in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus

Few patients with osteonecrosis that complicates human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection have been reported. We describe 5 patients whose symptoms of osteonecrosis developed with viral suppression and improvement in CD4 lymphocyte counts as a result of antiretroviral therapy. In addition, we review previously reported cases. The mean patient age was 35 years, and HIV was the sole risk factor in only 33%. Eighteen patients (55%) were receiving antiretroviral treatment when osteonecrosis was diagnosed. For 16 patients whose CD4 lymphocyte counts were reported, the mean CD4 count was 350 cells/mm(3). In 10 of these patients, the occurrence or worsening of symptoms of osteonecrosis appeared to be related to successful antiretroviral therapy. We conclude that osteonecrosis is an emerging manifestation of HIV infection and that it may be either a consequence of immunologic and virologic improvement resulting from antiretroviral therapy or a complication caused by the drugs themselves.