Comparing 2 Approaches for the File Review of Residency Applications.

BACKGROUND: The residency selection process relies on subjective information in applications, as well as subjective assessment of applications by reviewers. This inherent subjectivity makes residency selection prone to poor reliability between those reviewing files. OBJECTIVES: We compared the interrater reliability of 2 assessment tools during file review: one rating applicant traits (ie, leadership, communication) and the other using a global rating of application elements (ie, curriculum vitae, reference letters). METHODS: Ten file reviewers were randomized into 2 groups, and each scored 7 general surgery applications from the 2019-2020 cycle. The first group used an element-based (EB) scoring tool, while the second group used a trait-based (TB) scoring tool. Feedback was collected, discrimination capacities were measured using variation in scores, and interrater reliability (IRR) was calculated using intraclass correlation (ICC) in a 2-way random effects model. RESULTS: Both tools identified the same top-ranked and bottom-ranked applicants; however, discrepancies were noted for middle-ranked applicants. The score range for the 5 middle-ranked applicants was greater with the TB tool (6.43 vs 3.80), which also demonstrated fewer tie scores. The IRR for TB scoring was superior to EB scoring (ICC [2, 5] = 0.82 vs 0.55). The TB tool required only 2 raters to achieve an ICC ≥ 0.70. CONCLUSIONS: Using a TB file review strategy can facilitate file review with improved reliability compared to EB, and a greater spread of candidate scores. TB file review potentially offers programs a feasible way to optimize and reflect their institution's core values in the process.

Everyone Is Awesome: Analyzing Letters of Reference in a General Surgery Residency Selection Process.

BACKGROUND: The resident selection process involves the analysis of multiple data points, including letters of reference (LORs), which are inherently subjective in nature. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the frequency with which LORs use quantitative terms to describe applicants and to assess whether the use of these terms reflects the ranking of trainees in the final selection process. METHODS: A descriptive study analyzing LORs submitted by Canadian medical graduate applicants to the University of Ottawa General Surgery Program in 2019 was completed. We collected demographic information about applicants and referees and recorded the use of preidentified quantitative descriptors (eg, best, above average). A 10% audit of the data was performed. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the demographics of our letters as well as the frequency of use of the quantitative descriptors. RESULTS: Three hundred forty-three LORs for 114 applicants were analyzed. Eighty-five percent (291 of 343) of LORs used quantitative descriptors. Eighty-four percent (95 of 113) of applicants were described as above average, and 45% (51 of 113) were described as the "best" by at least 1 letter. The candidates described as the "best" ranked anywhere from second to 108th in our ranking system. CONCLUSIONS: Most LORs use quantitative descriptors. These terms are generally positive, and while the use does discriminate between different applicants, it was not helpful in the context of ranking applicants in our file review process.

A clinical prediction model for raised intracranial pressure in patients with traumatic brain injuries.

BACKGROUND: Intracranial hypertension is believed to contribute to secondary brain insult in traumatically brain injured patients. Currently, the diagnosis of intracranial hypertension requires intracranial monitoring or advanced imaging. Unfortunately, prehospital transport times can be prolonged, delaying time to the initial radiographic assessment. The aim of this study was to identify clinical variables associated with raised intracranial pressure (ICP) prior to the completion of neuroimaging. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of head injured patients over a 3-year period. Patients were labeled as having increased ICP if they had a single reading of ICP greater than 20 mm Hg within 1 hour of ICP monitor insertion or computed tomography findings suggestive of raised ICP. Patient and clinical characteristics were analyzed using stepwise multivariable logistic regression with ICP as the dependent variable. RESULTS: Of 701 head injured patients identified, 580 patients met inclusion criteria. Mean age was 48.65 ± 21 years, 73.3% were male. The mean Injury Severity Score was 22.71 ± 12.38, and the mean Abbreviated Injury Scale for body region head was 3.34 ± 1.06. Overall mortality was 14.7%. Only 46 (7.9%) patients had an ICP monitor inserted; however, a total of 107 (18%) patients met the definition of raised ICP. The mortality rate for patients with raised ICP was 50.4%. Independent predictors of raised ICP were as follows: age, older than 55 years (odds ratio [OR], 2.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.35-3.76), pupillary fixation (OR, 5.76; 95% CI, 3.16-10.50), signs of significant head trauma (OR, 2.431; 95% CI, 1.39-4.26), and need for intubation (OR, 3.589; 95% CI, 2.10-6.14). CONCLUSION: This study identified four independent variables associated with raised ICP and incorporated these findings into a preliminary risk assessment scale that can be implemented at the bedside to identify patients at significant risk of raised ICP. Future work is needed to prospectively validate these findings prior to clinical implementation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, Epidemiological, level III.

A Web-based module and online video for pain management education for caregivers of children with fractures: A randomized controlled trial.

IntroductionOver 80% of children experience compromise in functioning following a fracture. Digital media may improve caregiver knowledge of managing fracture pain at home. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether an educational video was superior to an interactive web-based module (WBM) and verbal instructions, the standard of care (SOC). METHODS: This randomized trial included caregivers of children 0-17 years presenting to the emergency department (ED) with non-operative fractures. Primary outcome was the gain score (pre-post intervention) on a 21-item questionnaire testing knowledge surrounding pain recognition and management for children with fractures. Secondary outcomes included survey of caregiver confidence in managing pain (five-item Likert scale), number of days with difficulty sleeping, before return to a normal diet, and work/school missed. RESULTS: We analyzed 311 participants (WBM 99; video 108; SOC 104) with a mean (SD) child age of 9.6 (4.2) years, of which 125/311 (40.2%) were female. The video (delta=2.3, 95% CI: 1.3, 3.3; p<0.001) and WBM (delta=1.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 2.6; p=0.002) groups had significantly greater gain scores than the SOC group. The mean video gain score was not significantly greater than WBM (delta=0.7; 95% CI: -0.3, 1.8; p=0.25). There were no significant differences in caregiver confidence (p=0.4), number of absent school days (p=0.43), nights with difficulty sleeping (p=0.94), days before return to a normal diet (p=0.07), or workdays missed (p=0.95). CONCLUSIONS: A web-based module and online video are superior to verbal instructions for improving caregiver knowledge on management of children's fracture pain without improvement in functional outcomes.