Needs assessment of essential anatomy: The perspective of adult primary care resident physicians.

Curricular development and modification involve first identifying a problem and then performing a needs assessment, which can guide the design of curricular components. Pedagogical changes, coupled with reductions in curricular time for gross anatomy, pose challenges and impose restrictions within medical school curricula. In order to make anatomy education effective and efficient, it is important to determine the anatomy considered essential for medical education through a targeted needs assessment. In this study, 50 adult primary care resident physicians in family medicine (FM) and internal medicine (IM) were surveyed to assess the importance of 907 anatomical structures, or groups of structures, across all anatomical regions from a curated list based on the boldface terms in four primary anatomy texts. There were no statistically significant differences in the ratings of structures between the two groups for any anatomical region. In total, 17.0% of structures, or groups of structures, were classified as essential, 58.0% as more important, 24.4% as less important, and 0.7% as not important. FM residents rated tissues classified as skeleton, nerves, fasciae, anatomical spaces, blood vessels, lymphatics, and surface anatomy (p < 0.0001) significantly higher than IM residents, but there were no differences in the rating of muscles or organs (p > 0.0056). It was notable that 100.0% of cranial nerves were classified as essential, and 94.5% of surface anatomy structures were classified as essential or more important. It is proposed that results of this study can serve to inform curricular development and revision.

Postoperative Myocardial Injury in Patients Classified as Low Risk Preoperatively Is Associated With a Particularly Increased Risk of Long-Term Mortality After Noncardiac Surgery.

Background Prior studies have shown an association between myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery (MINS) and all-cause mortality in patients following noncardiac surgery. However, the association between preoperative risk assessments, Revised Cardiac Risk Index and American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, and postoperative troponin elevations and long-term mortality is unknown. Methods and Results A retrospective chart review identified 548 patients who had a troponin I level drawn within 14 days of noncardiac surgery that required an overnight hospital stay. Patients aged 40 to 80 years with at least 2 cardiovascular risk factors were included, while those with trauma, pulmonary embolism, and neurosurgery were excluded. Kaplan-Meier survival and odds ratio (OR) with sensitivity/specificity analysis were performed to assess the association between preoperative risk and postoperative troponin elevation and all-cause mortality at 1 year. Overall, 69%/31% were classified as low-risk/high-risk per the Revised Cardiac Risk Index and 66%/34% per American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Comparing the low-risk versus high-risk groups, preoperative risk assessment was not associated with either postoperative troponin elevation or 1-year mortality. MINS portended a 1-year mortality of OR, 3.9 (95% CI, 2.44-6.33) in the total population. Patients classified as low risk preoperatively with MINS had the highest risk of 1-year mortality (OR, 9.6; 95% CI, 4.27-24.38), with a low prevalence of statin use. Conclusions Current preoperative risk stratification tools do not prognosticate the risk of postoperative troponin elevation and all-cause mortality at 1 year. Interestingly, patients classified as low risk preoperatively with MINS had a markedly higher 1-year mortality risk compared with the general population, and most of them are not taking a statin. Our results suggest that evaluating preoperatively low-risk patients for MINS presents an opportunity for prognostication, risk reclassification, and initiating therapies such as statins to mitigate long-term risk.