Abstract
Background/Purpose: Residency programs across the country are moving away from time-based training models toward competency-based programs. Competency refers to proficiency in technical dexterity, knowledge of anesthesia, and interpersonal skills. It is clear that a high level of capacity is desirable in these areas; however, is no universally accepted definition of competency exists as it relates to anesthesia. We propose that competence should be determined by those who work in the field of anesthesia using a definition where the expectations of our patients and clinical colleagues are valued and included.
Instructional Methods: We first performed a literature review of terms that we felt would inform us in our own understanding of competency; this also verified that no universally definition of competency existed. We then received ethics approval to carry out a qualitative research study using semi-structured interviews with 40 (ten in each cohort) patients, nurses, surgeons, and staff anesthesiologists. Participants were asked to share their perspective on competence and describe how that relates to their experiences and expectations with resident and staff anesthesiologists. Following this, interviews were transcribed and analyzed for emerging themes.
Target audience: Our objectives were: 1.) To determine the perspective of anesthesiologists, surgeons, nurses, and patients on competency in anesthesia and how this perspective compares and contrasts between roles 2.) To synthesize these perspectives into a cohesive, well-rounded concept of competency in anesthesia 3.) To describe how this concept can be applied to residency training programs to promote development of competent anesthesiologists
Summary/Results: We found several themes arose in participant interviews. First, the confidence of a trainee gave the appearance of competence, even though there was recognition that confidence and competence were distinct entities. Where it was found that a resident's actual ability did not match their perceived confidence, the resident lost credibility and was no longer seen as competent or trustworthy. As well, all participants described competence as being contextual. This meant that a trainee could be seen as competent in one setting but not be able to perform competently in a different set of circumstances; this pointed to the importance of varied and diverse learning opportunities. Second, competence in anesthesia referred to facilitation, meaning how well an anesthesiologist could facilitate a nurse's or surgeon's own tasks in being safe and patient focused, where anesthesiologists felt it was their own duty to be safe and patient focused in their own tasks. Third, patients measured the competence of their anesthesiologist using tangible measures closely linked to objective outcomes, for example absence of awareness and post operative analgesia. Lastly, there was universal recognition that competence was a spectrum composed of multiple components, but minimal proficiency in all domains was required to be considered wholly competent. This meant that communication and personal qualities were not underestimated.
Conclusion: In summary, we feel that competence is the ability to fulfil the duties of one's job and meet the expectations of those with whom we work and care for. Different professions will have expectations of competency based on how they view the anesthesiologist plays a role in supporting their own duties. Patients will have expectations based on their knowledge and previous experiences of anesthesiologists and we should expect this to be quite limited in some situations. Here, we should play an active role in education and preparation. Regardless of different expectations, our findings point to the significance of an inter-professional definition of competence being one that includes communication and leadership skills as well as qualities of understanding, compassion, and fairness.