Training in intensive care medicine. A challenge within reach.

The medical training model is currently immersed in a process of change. The new paradigm is intended to be more effective, more integrated within the healthcare system, and strongly oriented towards the direct application of knowledge to clinical practice. Compared with the established training system based on certification of the completion of a series or rotations and stays in certain healthcare units, the new model proposes a more structured training process based on the gradual acquisition of specific competences, in which residents must play an active role in designing their own training program. Training based on competences guarantees more transparent, updated and homogeneous learning of objective quality, and which can be homologated internationally. The tutors play a key role as the main directors of the process, and institutional commitment to their work is crucial. In this context, tutors should receive time and specific formation to allow the evaluation of training as the cornerstone of the new model. New forms of objective summative and training evaluation should be introduced to guarantee that the predefined competences and skills are effectively acquired. The free movement of specialists within Europe is very desirable and implies that training quality must be high and amenable to homologation among the different countries. The Competency Based training in Intensive Care Medicine in Europe program is our main reference for achieving this goal. Scientific societies in turn must impulse and facilitate all those initiatives destined to improve healthcare quality and therefore specialist training. They have the mission of designing strategies and processes that favor training, accreditation and advisory activities with the government authorities.

Models for intensive care training. A European perspective.

The diversity of European culture is reflected in its healthcare training programs. In intensive care medicine (ICM), the differences in national training programs were so marked that it was unlikely that they could produce specialists of equivalent skills. The Competency-Based Training in Intensive Care Medicine in Europe (CoBaTrICE) program was established in 2003 as a Europe-based worldwide collaboration of national training organizations to create core competencies for ICM using consensus methodologies to establish common ground. The group's professional and research ethos created a social identity that facilitated change. The program was easily adaptable to different training structures and incorporated the voice of patients and relatives. The CoBaTrICE program has now been adopted by 15 European countries, with another 12 countries planning to adopt the training program, and is currently available in nine languages, including English. ICM is now recognized as a primary specialty in Spain, Switzerland, and the UK. There are still wide variations in structures and processes of training in ICM across Europe, although there has been agreement on a set of common program standards. The combination of a common "product specification" for an intensivist, combined with persisting variation in the educational context in which competencies are delivered, provides a rich source of research inquiry. Pedagogic research in ICM could usefully focus on the interplay between educational interventions, healthcare systems and delivery, and patient outcomes, such as including whether competency-based program are associated with lower error rates, whether communication skills training is associated with greater patient and family satisfaction, how multisource feedback might best be used to improve reflective learning and teamworking, or whether increasing the proportion of specialists trained in acute care in the hospital at weekends results in better patient outcomes.

Intensive care without walls - introduction of a Medical Emergency Team system in a Swiss tertiary care centre.

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY To improve the response of deteriorating patients during their hospital stay, the University Hospital Bern has introduced a Medical Emergency Team (MET). Aim of this retrospective cohort study is to review the preceding factors, patient characteristics, process parameters and their correlation to patient outcomes of MET calls since the introduction of the team. METHODS Data on patient characteristics, parameters related to MET activation and intervention and patient outcomes were evaluated. A Vital Sign Score (VSS), which is defined as the sum of the occurrence of each vital sign abnormalities, was calculated for all physiological parameters pre MET event, during event and correlation with hospital outcomes. RESULTS A total of 1,628 MET calls in 1,317 patients occurred; 262 (19.9%) of patients with MET calls during their hospital stay died. The VSS pre MET event (odds ratio [OR] 1.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.50-2.13; AUROC 0.63; all p <0.0001) and during the MET call (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.41-1.83; AUROC 0.62; all p <0.0001) were significantly correlated to patient outcomes. A significant increase in MET calls from 5.2 to 16.5 per 1000 hospital admissions (p <0.0001) and a decrease in cardiac arrest calls in the MET perimeter from 1.6 in 2008 to 0.8 per 1000 admissions was observed during the study period (p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS The VSS is a significant predictor of mortality in patients assessed by the MET. Increasing MET utilisation coincided with a decrease in cardiac arrest calls in the MET perimeter.

International standards for programmes of training in intensive care medicine in Europe.

PURPOSE To develop internationally harmonised standards for programmes of training in intensive care medicine (ICM). METHODS Standards were developed by using consensus techniques. A nine-member nominal group of European intensive care experts developed a preliminary set of standards. These were revised and refined through a modified Delphi process involving 28 European national coordinators representing national training organisations using a combination of moderated discussion meetings, email, and a Web-based tool for determining the level of agreement with each proposed standard, and whether the standard could be achieved in the respondent's country. RESULTS The nominal group developed an initial set of 52 possible standards which underwent four iterations to achieve maximal consensus. All national coordinators approved a final set of 29 standards in four domains: training centres, training programmes, selection of trainees, and trainers' profiles. Only three standards were considered immediately achievable by all countries, demonstrating a willingness to aspire to quality rather than merely setting a minimum level. Nine proposed standards which did not achieve full consensus were identified as potential candidates for future review. CONCLUSIONS This preliminary set of clearly defined and agreed standards provides a transparent framework for assuring the quality of training programmes, and a foundation for international harmonisation and quality improvement of training in ICM.

Measuring Intensity of End of Life Care: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND Many studies have measured the intensity of end of life care. However, no summary of the measures used in the field is currently available. OBJECTIVES To summarise features, characteristics of use and reported validity of measures used for evaluating intensity of end of life care. METHODS This was a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. We performed a comprehensive literature search in Ovid Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews and reference lists published between 1990-2014. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, full texts and extracted data. Studies were eligible if they used a measure of end of life care intensity, defined as all quantifiable measures describing the type and intensity of medical care administered during the last year of life. RESULTS A total of 58 of 1590 potentially eligible studies met our inclusion criteria and were included. The most commonly reported measures were hospitalizations (n = 44), intensive care unit admissions (n = 39) and chemotherapy use (n = 27). Studies measured intensity of care in different timeframes ranging from 48 hours to 12 months. The majority of studies were conducted in cancer patients (n = 31). Only 4 studies included information on validation of the measures used. None evaluated construct validity, while 3 studies considered criterion and 1 study reported both content and criterion validity. CONCLUSIONS This review provides a synthesis to aid in choosing intensity of end of life care measures based on their previous use but simultaneously highlights the crucial need for more validation studies and consensus in the field.