ABSTRACT
Background: As competency-based medical education (CBME) is implemented across Canada, little is known about residents' perceptions of this model. This study examined how Canadian residents understand CBME and their lived experiences with implementation. Methods: We administered a survey in 2018 with Likert-type and open-ended questions to 375 residents across Canada, of whom 270 were from traditional programs ("pre-CBME") and 105 were in a CBME program. We used the Mann-Whitney test to examine differences across samples, and analyzed qualitative data thematically. Results: Three themes were identified across both groups: program outcome concerns, changes, and emotional responses. In relation to program concerns, both groups were concerned about the administrative burden, challenges with the assessment process, and feedback quality. Only pre-CBME residents were concerned about faculty engagement and buy-in. In terms of changes, both groups discussed a more formalized assessment process with mixed reactions. Residents in the pre-CBME sample reported greater concerns for faculty time constraints, assessment completion, and quality of learning experiences, whilst those in CBME programs reported being more proactive in their learning and greater selfreflection. Residents expressed strong emotional narrative responses including greater stress and frustration in a CBME environment. Conclusion: Findings demonstrate that residents have mixed feelings and experiences regarding CBME. Their positive experiences align with the aim of developing more self-directed learners. However, the concerns suggest the need to address specific shortcomings to increase buy-in, while the emotional responses associated with CBME may require a cultural shift within residency programs to guard against burnout.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The novel pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block has recently been reported to provide effective motor-sparing local anesthetic-based analgesia to the hip joint. We aimed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of a preoperative PENG block among patients undergoing ambulatory hip arthroscopic surgery where systemic analgesia is the gold standard. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, retrospective pragmatic exploratory cohort study of consecutive outpatient hip arthroscopic surgery cases from January 2017 to March 2019. We identified 164 cases in which patients received general anesthesia with or without a preoperative PENG block. The primary analgesic outcome measures were time to first postoperative analgesic request, intraoperative and postoperative opioid consumption (intravenous morphine equivalent), and postoperative pain severity (visual analog scale 10 cm scale ranging from 0=no pain to 10=severe pain) in hospital. Secondary outcomes included duration of stay in the postanesthesia care unit, opioid-related side effects, time to discharge readiness, and block-related complications. RESULTS: Seventy-five cases received a preoperative PENG block and 89 cases received systemic analgesia alone. The addition of a PENG block reduced intraoperative (6.6 mg vs 7.5 mg, difference: 0.9 mg; 95% CI 0.2 to 1.7; p=0.01) and postoperative (10.7 mg vs 13.9 mg, difference: 3.2 mg; 95% CI 0.9 to 5.5; p=0.01) intravenous morphine consumption, as well as the mean (3.5 vs 4.2, difference: 0.7; 95% CI 0.1 to 1.3; p=0.03) and highest (5.5 vs 6.5, difference: 1.0; 95% CI 0.2 to 1.7; p=0.02) postoperative pain severity scores in hospital. The PENG block did not prolong the time to first analgesic request (15.8 min vs 12.3 min, difference: 3.5 min; 95% CI -9.0 to 2.0; p=0.23). Fewer patients in the PENG group experienced postoperative nausea and vomiting compared with systemic analgesia alone (36% vs 52%, OR 1.9; 95% CI 1.0 to 3.6; p=0.02), while the PENG block expedited discharge readiness (165.0 min vs 202.8 min, difference: 37.8 min; 95% CI 2.9 to 72.3; p=0.04). No block-related complications were noted in any patient. DISCUSSION: Based on our retrospective dataset, this pragmatic exploratory cohort study suggests that a preoperative PENG block is associated with questionable improvements in postoperative in-hospital analgesic outcomes which may or may not prove to be clinically relevant when compared with systemic analgesia alone for patients undergoing hip arthroscopic surgery. This small signal should be investigated in a prospective randomized trial.
