PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-3 (3)
 

Clipboard (0)
None

Select a Filter Below

Journals
Year of Publication
Document Types
1.  A Citation Tracking System to Facilitate Sponsoring Institution Oversight of ACGME-Accredited Programs 
Background
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires the graduate medical education committee and the designated institutional official to ensure that citations for noncompliance with the accreditation standards and institutional trends in citations are reviewed and corrected.
Objective
To describe a citation tracking system (CTS) that uses Microsoft Office Access to efficiently catalogue, monitor, and document resolution of citations.
Innovation
The CTS was implemented in a sponsoring institution with oversight of 133 ACGME-accredited programs. The designated institutional official and the graduate medical education committee review all program letters of notification and enter citations into the CTS. A program-correction plan is required for each citation and is entered into the database. Open citations and action plans are reviewed by the graduate medical education committee and the designated institutional official on a quarterly basis, with decisions ranging from “closing” the citation to approving the action plan in process to requiring a new or modified action plan. Citation categories and subcategories are accessed on the ACGME website and entered into the CTS to identify trends.
Results
All 236 citations received since the 2006 Mayo School of Graduate Medical Education institutional site visit were entered into the CTS. On November 22, 2011, 26 of 236 citations (11%) were in active status with ongoing action plans, and 210 (89%) citations had been resolved and were closed.
Conclusions
The CTS uses commercially available software to ensure citations are monitored and addressed and to simplify analysis of citation trends. The approach requires minimal staff time for data input and updates and can be performed without institutional information technology assistance.
doi:10.4300/JGME-D-11-00313.1
PMCID: PMC3546582  PMID: 24294429
2.  Preoperative Gabapentin for Acute Post-thoracotomy Analgesia: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Active Placebo-Controlled Study 
Pain Practice  2011;12(3):175-183.
Background
The role of preoperative gabapentin in postoperative pain management is not clear, particularly in patients receiving regional blockade. Patients undergoing thoracotomy benefit from epidural analgesia but still may experience significant postoperative pain. We examined the effect of preoperative gabapentin in thoracotomy patients.
Methods
Adults undergoing elective thoracotomy were enrolled in this prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, and randomly assigned to receive 600 mg gabapentin or active placebo (12.5 mg diphenhydramine) orally within 2 hours preoperatively. Standardized management included thoracic epidural infusion, intravenous patient-controlled opioid analgesia, acetaminophen and ketorolac. Pain scores, opioid use and side effects were recorded for 48 hours. Pain was also assessed at 3 months.
Results
One hundred twenty patients (63 placebo and 57 gabapentin) were studied. Pain scores did not significantly differ at any time point (p=0.53). Parenteral and oral opioid consumption was not significantly different between groups on postoperative day 1 or 2 (p>0.05 in both cases). The frequency of side effects such as nausea and vomiting or respiratory depression was not significantly different between groups, but gabapentin was associated with decreased frequency of pruritus requiring nalbuphine (14% gabapentin vs. 43% control group, p<0.001). The frequency of patients experiencing pain at 3 months post-thoracotomy was also comparable between groups (70% gabapentin vs. 66% placebo group, p=0.72).
Conclusions
A single preoperative oral dose of gabapentin (600 mg) did not reduce pain scores or opioid consumption following elective thoracotomy, and did not confer any analgesic benefit in the setting of effective multimodal analgesia that included thoracic epidural infusion.
doi:10.1111/j.1533-2500.2011.00480.x
PMCID: PMC3200555  PMID: 21676165
Pain; Postoperative; post-thoracotomy pain; Preanesthetic Medication; Acute Pain Service; Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia; gabapentin
3.  Accreditation council for graduate medical education (ACGME) annual anesthesiology residency and fellowship program review: a "report card" model for continuous improvement 
BMC Medical Education  2010;10:13.
Background
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires an annual evaluation of all ACGME-accredited residency and fellowship programs to assess program quality. The results of this evaluation must be used to improve the program. This manuscript describes a metric to be used in conducting ACGME-mandated annual program review of ACGME-accredited anesthesiology residencies and fellowships.
Methods
A variety of metrics to assess anesthesiology residency and fellowship programs are identified by the authors through literature review and considered for use in constructing a program "report card."
Results
Metrics used to assess program quality include success in achieving American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) certification, performance on the annual ABA/American Society of Anesthesiology In-Training Examination, performance on mock oral ABA certification examinations, trainee scholarly activities (publications and presentations), accreditation site visit and internal review results, ACGME and alumni survey results, National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) results, exit interview feedback, diversity data and extensive program/rotation/faculty/curriculum evaluations by trainees and faculty. The results are used to construct a "report card" that provides a high-level review of program performance and can be used in a continuous quality improvement process.
Conclusions
An annual program review is required to assess all ACGME-accredited residency and fellowship programs to monitor and improve program quality. We describe an annual review process based on metrics that can be used to focus attention on areas for improvement and track program performance year-to-year. A "report card" format is described as a high-level tool to track educational outcomes.
doi:10.1186/1472-6920-10-13
PMCID: PMC2830223  PMID: 20141641

Results 1-3 (3)