The new Diploma of Rural Generalist Anaesthesia: Supporting Australian rural and remote communities.

In 2023, a Diploma of Rural Generalist Anaesthesia (DipRGA) was implemented across Australia. Developed collaboratively by the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA), the Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine (ACRRM) and the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP), the 12-month qualification is completed during or following ACRRM or RACGP Rural Generalist Fellowship training. Focused on the needs of rural and remote communities for elective and emergency surgery, maternity care, resuscitative care for medical illness or injury, and stabilisation for retrieval, the DipRGA supports rural generalist anaesthetists working within collaborative teams in geographically isolated settings. The goal is a graduate who can anaesthetise American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class 1, 2 and stable 3 patients for elective surgery, provide obstetric anaesthesia and analgesia, anaesthetise paediatric patients and undertake advanced crisis care within their scope of practice. Crucially, they also recognise both limitations of their skills and local resources available when considering whether to provide care, defer, refer or transfer patients. DipRGA curriculum design commenced by adapting the ANZCA specialist training curriculum with consideration of the training approach of both the ACRRM and the RACGP, particularly the rural and remote context. Curriculum content is addressed in seven entrustable professional activities supported by workplace-based assessments and multisource feedback. Trainees are supervised by rural generalist anaesthetists and specialist anaesthetists, and complete flexible learning activities to accommodate geographical dispersion. Standardised summative assessments include an early test of knowledge and an examination, adapted from the ACRRM structured assessment using multiple patient scenarios.

Informed consent: perceptions and practice of orthopaedic trainees.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of informed consent is to provide patients with adequate information about a proposed plan or intervention, including the benefits and risks, so that they can make an informed decision about their medical treatment. The literature suggests that trainees are often delegated the task of obtaining consent with inadequate knowledge, skill or experience. The aim of this study is to determine the extent orthopaedic surgical trainees have been exposed to education about the informed consent, their perceived ability to obtain consent effectively and the frequency with which they routinely address elements of the process when consenting patients. METHODS: An eight-item questionnaire assessing trainees' experience with informed consent was distributed to trainees undertaking Australian orthopaedic surgery training in 2019. RESULTS: Of the 239 trainees, 102 completed the questionnaire. Although 99% of trainees were confident that they can obtain valid consent from patients, when asked about aspects of the process, many trainees do not address them. Only 29% of trainees always ask patients about goals of care and 21% always advise the patient of who will be performing the procedure. Trainees who indicated that they had received education on informed consent during surgical training are significantly more likely to address key elements. CONCLUSION: Trainees' perceptions of their knowledge and skill in relation to informed consent does not align with their reported practice. Although the majority of trainees had received some education on informed consent, greater emphasis on explicit teaching and formal assessment should be undertaken during surgical training, prior to trainees completing this activity independently.

Gender associations with selection into Australian Orthopaedic Surgical Training: 2007-2019.

BACKGROUND: Communities have better health outcomes when their clinicians reflect the diversity of the communities they serve. More than 50% of Australian medical school graduates are female, yet women represent less than 5% of Australian orthopaedic surgeons. Selection into orthopaedic surgical training in Australia is an annual, nation-wide process, based on curriculum vitae (CV), referee reports and performance in multiple mini-interviews (MMI). The influence of applicant gender on these selection scores was examined. METHODS: The CV, referee reports and MMI scores used for selection for each year from 2007 to 2019 were analysed from the perspective of the applicant's gender. RESULTS: Over the years of the study, male applicants had higher CV scores and referee report scores, which determined the gender proportions invited to interview. By contrast, the interview process and selection from interview did not demonstrate a gender association. CONCLUSION: We describe the impact of selection tools, utilized over the past 13 years, on the gender diversity of trainees commencing orthopaedic surgery training in Australia. Leaders in postgraduate training should examine commonly used selection procedures to identify and reduce the unconscious biases that may affect their performance and value.

Australian orthopaedic surgery training: Australian Orthopaedic Association's strategic education review.

BACKGROUND: The Australian Orthopaedic Association (AOA) is the peak professional body for orthopaedic surgeons in Australia and is responsible for their training and continuing medical education. The 2012 AOA strategic education review employed a gap analysis to identify issues and generate a roadmap for the enhancement of AOA's education and training activities. This paper describes the process and outcomes of this review, which led to the 'AOA 21' Education Re-design Project, and the review's relevance to surgical education in Australia. METHODS: The AOA strategic education review was undertaken by international clinician education and orthopaedic experts, and involved AOA staff, fellows and trainee members throughout Australia. This review progressed through four phases: a review of current training; a global 'best-practice' perspective; a set of aspirational goals; and a roadmap for implementation. RESULTS: Seven key strengths (e.g. camaraderie in training and surgical skills teaching) and 15 challenges (e.g. 'non-technical' skills teaching, subjective methods of decision making and inadequate assessment practices) were identified in the review stage. Sixteen major recommendations for improvements incorporating current or emerging world's best education practices were targeted in an 8-year implementation framework. CONCLUSION: The AOA's strategic education review serves as a roadmap for other specialty training organizations to review their programmes and implement contemporary best practices in surgical training. The AOA 21 project has positioned orthopaedic surgery as a leader in competency-based surgical education and training in Australia.