Collaborative governance of postgraduate medical education: Can it be achieved?

Faced with the need to modernize and improve the postgraduate medical education experience and to maintain the high quality of physicians that Canadians expect, in 2010, four organizations -Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada (AFMC); Collège des Médecins du Québec (CMQ); College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC); and Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC) formed a consortium to conduct a review of Postgraduate Medical Education (PGME) in Canada. In 2012, the Consortium published the Future of Medical Education in Canada Postgraduate (FMEC PG) project's 10 recommendations for change in PGME. One of these recommendations was to 'Establish Effective Collaborative Governance in PGME'. The recommendation stated- 'Recognizing the complexity of PGME and the health delivery system within which it operates, integrate the multiple bodies (regulatory and certifying colleges, educational and healthcare institutions) that play a role in PGME into a collaborative governance structure in order to achieve efficiency, reduce redundancy, and provide clarity on strategic directions and decisions' The purpose of this paper is to describe the creation, function and dissolution of a collaborative governance structure within the complex system of PGME and the challenges that were faced in its sustainability. The lessons learned are applicable internationally where integration of multiple organizations is being attempted. A fundamental question remains as to whether a consensus-based decision-making process can ever be achieved among organizations with overlapping mandates and in some cases, hierarchical structures?

The Rising Challenge of Training Physician-Scientists: Recommendations From a Canadian National Consensus Conference.

Physician-scientists are individuals who actively participate in patient care, have undergone additional research training, and devote the majority of their time to research. Physician-scientists are traditionally the primary catalysts in bridging the translational gap-that is, the failure to link fundamental new knowledge in the pathobiology of disease with advances in health care and health policy in a timely manner. However, there has been a shift away from training physician-scientists, and financial support for the physician-scientist is diminishing globally, causing the translational gap to grow. Given its socialized health care system and cultural and geographic diversity, Canada can serve as a unique case study in understanding how to address this phenomenon as a national priority. To this end, a Canadian national consensus conference was convened to develop recommendations for training programs and early-career supports for physician-scientists. Five recommendations were generated: (1) Establish an independent, national council whose mandate is to provide pan-Canadian oversight of physician-scientist training programs; (2) develop capacity for funding and mentorship support for physician-scientists; (3) develop coherent networks across a broad range of clinician-scientists, including physician-scientists, to reflect the unique cultural and geographic diversity of Canada and to reflect the interdisciplinarity of health research; (4) ensure that medical school curricula integrate, as a core curriculum feature, an understanding of the scientific basis of health care, including research methodologies; and (5) ensure that the funding of the physician-scientist trainee is viewed as portable and distinct from the operational funding provided to the training program itself.

Smoothing the Transition Points in Canadian Medical Education.

In 2010, the Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada, Collège des médecins du Québec, College of Family Physicians of Canada, and Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada launched the Future of Medical Education in Canada Postgraduate (FMEC PG) Project to examine postgraduate medical education (PGME) in Canada and make recommendations for improvement. One recommendation that emerged concerns the transitions learners experience across the undergraduate medical education-PGME-practice continuum. The FMEC PG, using a thorough process, developed projects to address these often-tumultuous transitions for the learner, aiming to provide support, tools, and standards for the learner's educational journey.With leadership by two senior academics and the Transitions Implementation Committee, three working groups helped implement these transitions projects, which addressed (1) the medical-school-to-residency transition, (2) career planning and the residency matching process, and (3) the residency-to-practice transition. Work products include the development of a learner education handover protocol and the establishment of pan-Canadian entrustable professional activities to be used nationally to help define expectations for new graduates entering residencies. A postmatch boot camp tool and a simulated night on-call tool were developed and are available to all medical schools. National standards are being promoted for career services counseling and best practices in residency selection. A practice management curriculum framework, mentorship resources, resiliency training for graduating residents, and the entry-level disciplines of residency are also being explored.Ultimately, with system-wide change and better integration of all players, transitions for Canada's learners will greatly improve.

Exploring the factors that influence the ratio of generalists to other specialists in Canada.

OBJECTIVE: To explore perceptions about the factors that influence the ratio of generalists to other specialists. DESIGN: Semistructured interviews. SETTING: Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Thirteen individuals who were closely involved in medical education and health human resource planning or had a role in influencing medical education policy. METHODS: Telephone interviews were conducted with participants until data saturation was reached. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using constant comparison techniques. For the purpose of simplifying discourse, family medicine and generalism were treated as synonymous throughout the interviews. MAIN FINDINGS: Seven themes emerged from participants' responses: ratio of generalists to specialists, importance of generalism, barriers to generalism, role of the medical education system, role of policy makers, geographic location, and the future of generalism. CONCLUSION: Most respondents perceived the ratio of specialists to generalists as roughly even and believed the reasons for this balance included increased attention from policy makers, a greater presence of family physicians in research and teaching, and a shift toward a more regional and representative distribution of medical education facilities. Respondents also highlighted challenges within family medicine including providers choosing a narrower scope of practice, a shift away from generalism, and ongoing inequities between family physicians and other specialties in terms of remuneration, lifestyle, and prestige.

The Future of Postgraduate Medical Education in Canada.

The Future of Medical Education in Canada Postgraduate (FMEC PG) Project was launched in 2010 by a consortium of four organizations: the Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada, the Collège des Médecins du Québec, the College of Family Physicians of Canada, and the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. The FMEC PG study set out to review the state of the Canadian postgraduate medical education (PGME) system and make recommendations for improvements and changes. The extensive process included literature reviews, commissioned papers, stakeholder interviews, international consultations, and dialogue with the public and learners. The resulting key findings and 10 recommendations, published in a report in 2012, represent the collective vision of the consortium partner organizations for PGME in Canada. Implementation of the recommendations began in 2013 and will continue beyond 2016.In this article, the authors describe the complex process of developing the recommendations, highlight several recommendations, consider implementation processes and issues, and share lessons learned to date. They reflect on the ways in which the transformation of a very complex and complicated PGME system has required many stakeholders to work together on multiple interventions simultaneously. Notwithstanding the challenges for the participating organizations, changes have been introduced and sustainability is being forged. Throughout this process, the consortium partners and other stakeholders have continued to address the social accountability role of all physicians with respect to the public they serve.

AMEE 2010 symposium: medical student education in the twenty-first century - a new Flexnerian era?

As we mark the 100th anniversary of the Flexner report which revolutionized the process of medical education, there is again concern that we face a critical need for change in the process of medical education in order to meet the needs of learners, teachers, and patients. In this symposium, panelists shared perspectives on medical education reform from throughout the world, including The Future of Medical Education in Canada, the role of regulators in contributing to reform, the evolution of accreditation standards, the current state of medical education in Southeast Asia, and the perspectives of a medical student on medical education reform. In the "Audience discussion" section, themes emerged surrounding medical education as a social good, the need for governmental support of medical education, the cost of medical education and the rise of for-profit medical schools, and embracing a broader view of health professional education. There remain remarkable parallels in calls for reform in medical education at the turn of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries but education which is patient-centered and actively involves the voices of our patients and our students is likely to be a hallmark.

In the spirit of Flexner: working toward a collective vision for the future of medical education in Canada.

The Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada launched the Future of Medical Education in Canada (FMEC) Project in 2007. The FMEC Project's overarching goal was to comprehensively examine the current state of undergraduate medical education, concentrating on its alignment with current and future societal needs. Like Flexner's work, the FMEC Project used a process of reflection and renewal; unlike Flexner's work, the FMEC Project used multiple techniques to gather information, including literature reviews, key informant interviews, international visits, and a series of consultations with stakeholders and expert groups. The project's final report, The Future of Medical Education in Canada: A Collective Vision, put forth 10 recommendations that summarized priority areas for academic medicine and medical training in Canada at the start of the 21st century. The current article reviews FMEC Project recommendations in relation to the priorities set out by Flexner in 1910. In some areas, such as the scientific basis of medical education, there is striking congruence between Flexner's views and today's collective vision. In other areas, such as community-based learning, opinion appears to have shifted markedly over the past century, and concepts such as interprofessionalism may represent distinctly modern domains. While Flexnerian themes tend to center on the notion of medicine as science, present-day priorities converge on the link between academic medicine and societal needs. By looking back on Flexner's work, we can see where his vision has taken us. As well, we see more clearly the new frontiers that academic medicine will continue to explore.

Faculties of medicine: important contributors to health human resource planning in Canada.

Tzountzouris and Gilbert's article "Role of Educational Institutions in Identifying and Responding to Emerging Health Human Resources Needs" makes an interesting contribution to the literature on health human resources (HHR) planning in Canada, focusing specifically on the potential role of educational institutions. In this commentary, we argue that Canada's faculties of medicine are already heavily involved in meeting the HHR needs of Canadians and are extremely well poised to become even more involved in the process of HHR planning. Our faculties of medicine look forward to the time when Canada has a pan-Canadian, multi-professional HHR planning mechanism to which they can contribute.

Generalism versus subspecialization: changes necessary in medical education.

During the initial Partners Meeting of the Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada (AFMC), the Canadian Association for Medical Education (CAME), the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC), the Medical Council of Canada (MCC), and the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC) in May 2005, a plenary discussion and debate focused on the tensions that exist between generalist and subspecialty education within both the undergraduate and postgraduate educational programs in Canadian medical schools. Key issues identified in the debate included medical student selection, generalist representation on medical school faculty and in learning experiences, and the need for a greater teaching role and respect for generalism to be developed.

Weekly work hours and clinical activities of Canadian family physicians: results of the 1997/98 National Family Physician Survey of the College of Family Physicians of Canada.

BACKGROUND: Health systems planning is a challenging task, exacerbated by a lack of detailed information on the role played by family physicians, as indicated by practice variations across regions and demographic characteristics. Outcome measures used in past studies of family physician practice patterns were not uniform. Furthermore, past research has generally been limited to narrowly defined geographic regions. A national study of family physician practice patterns was undertaken to allow regional-level comparisons of clinical workload and range of medical services offered. METHODS: The 1997/98 National Family Physician Survey was mailed to a sample of 5198 Canadian family physicians and general practitioners (FP/GPs); the overall response rate was 58.4% (3036 questionnaires returned, of which 3004 were analyzable). Sampling strata were based on College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC) membership status and regions of Canada. RESULTS: Clinical workload varied considerably across the demographic categories studied. Male physicians reported 8.9 more total weekly work hours than female physicians, but the mean number of medical and clinical services offered did not differ between the sexes. Solo practitioners reported 53.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 52.7-55.0) total weekly work hours, whereas those practising in multidisciplinary clinics reported 45.0 (95% CI 43.2-46.8) hours. FP/GPs in the Atlantic and Prairie provinces reported 5.6 and 5.1 more weekly work hours, respectively, than the national average of 51.4 (95% CI 50.8-52.0) hours. Finally, FP/GPs who served inner-city populations reported 48.6 (95% CI 46.8-50.5) total weekly work hours, whereas those serving rural populations reported 57.0 (95% CI 54.7-59.2) hours. Mean weekly work hours were similar for all age cohorts less than 65 years. FP/GPs practising in less populated provinces and in rural areas reported the highest numbers of work hours, medical services offered and clinical procedures performed. INTERPRETATION: These data suggest significant variations in FP/GP clinical workload in relation to key demographic variables.