ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Anesthesiology education has undergone profound changes over the past century, from a pure clinical apprenticeship to novel comprehensive curricula based on andragogic learning theories. Combined with institutional and regulatory requirements, these new curricula have propagated professionalization of the clinician-educator role. A significant number of clinician-educator anesthesiologists, often with support from department chairs, pursue formal health professions education (HPE) training, yet there are no published data demonstrating the benefits or costs of these degrees to educational leaders. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to collect the experiences of anesthesiologists who have pursued HPE degrees to understand the advantages and costs of HPE degrees to anesthesiologists. METHODS: Investigators performed a qualitative study of anesthesiologists with HPE degrees working at academic medical centers. Interviews were thematically analyzed via an iterative process. They were coded using a team-based approach, and representative themes and exemplary quotations were identified. RESULTS: Seven anesthesiologists were interviewed, representing diverse geographic regions, subspecialties, and medical institutions. Analyses of interview transcripts resulted in the following 6 core themes: outcomes, extrinsic motivators, intrinsic motivators, investment, experience, and recommendations. The interviewees noted the advantages of HPE training for those wishing to pursue leadership or scholarship in medical education; however, they also noted the costs and investment of time in addition to preexisting commitments. The interviewees also highlighted the issues faculty and chairs might consider for the optimal timing of HPE training. CONCLUSIONS: There are numerous professional and personal benefits to pursuing HPE degrees for faculty interested in education leadership or scholarship. Making an informed decision to pursue HPE training can be challenging when considering the competing pressures of clinical work and personal obligations. The experiences of the interviewed anesthesiologists offer direction to future anesthesiologists and chairs in their decision-making process of whether and when to pursue HPE training.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Understanding how different countries have responded to mitigate the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2) transmission in dental offices is important. This article describes the different approaches taken towards optimal fallow periods in Canadian jurisdictions. METHODS: We searched publicly available information from dentist and dental hygiene regulator websites across the 10 provinces and 3 territories in Canada. We also searched for guidance documents on dental associations' websites or through personal communication with government officials. We extracted and tabulated information on fallow period recommendations or guidance, when available. RESULTS: Nine jurisdictions (6 provinces and all 3 territories) acknowledge or provide guidance on fallow periods following aerosol-generating procedures. Among those who have provided guidance regarding a fallow period, recommendations follow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance if the air changes per hour (ACH) in the dental operatory is known. CONCLUSION: The evidence for deciding on optimal fallow period is limited and still being explored, resulting in substantial variation across Canadian jurisdictions. A focus on developing scientific evidence relevant to dentistry and assimilating existing science is crucial to establishing consistency and uniformity in information to deliver safe oral health care services.