| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Correspondence |
* SMBD Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Canada, E-mail: fbeique{at}ana.jgh.mcgill.ca
We thank Dr. Bosenberg, Dr. Dobson and Dr. Vuksic for their interest in the recently published Canadian guidelines for training in adult perioperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE).1 The consensus panel discussed in great detail the importance of dedicated echocardiography training to achieve a basic level of expertise. Several points need to be emphasized to further explain the recommendations outlined in the Canadian guidelines. First, it is important that trainees receive dedicated and concentrated exposure to TEE unencumbered by other clinical responsibilities and distractions. With the current human resource shortage, such distractions can easily overshadow the trainee’s needs. Our experience with trainees suggests that intermittent TEE exposure during training with inconsistent TEE attendance resulted in poor grasp of the necessary concepts, poor skills at probe manipulation, and slow performance of the echocardiographic examination. Teachers may also feel frustrated due to inefficient repetitions of previously taught principles that were forgotten when there is only sporadic exposure to TEE. Moreover, as stated in the guidelines, although the exact duration of training is not as important as completing the required number of echocardiographic examinations and continuing medical education (CME) hours, the proposed three months of training at a basic level is consistent with previously published cardiology guidelines for training in echocardiography. 2–4
Achieving a basic level of expertise is rewarded in the Canadian guidelines with a level of autonomy which enables the independent echocardiographic assessment of cardiac pathology and surgical procedures including uncomplicated valve surgery. Consultation with a physician who has achieved an advanced level of expertise should only be necessary in more complex cases or when new TEE findings may result in a modification of the surgical procedure. Therefore, training at a basic level must be adequate for the trainee to have the ability to identify and recognize cardiac findings that may be significant and would require consultation. A wrong diagnosis or failure to identify important cardiac pathology can have catastrophic consequences for the patient. It is essential that this level of autonomy is associated with stringent training criteria as outlined in the Canadian guidelines. Moreover, the issue of consultation when abnormalities are detected should be viewed as a positive learning experience that will improve patient care. This process should also allow physicians with basic training to further their knowledge and potentially progress to an advanced level of expertise in parallel with clinical activity as described in the Canadian guidelines.1 Even advanced practitioners regularly engage in this exercise when confronted with more complex cardiac cases.
It is not the intent of the panel to dismiss alternate training pathways. In fact, we have stated "The current consensus acknowledges that there are several valid training pathways to achieve each level of expertise in perioperative echocardiography. The Canadian training guidelines in perioperative TEE only highlight some of the possible training pathways that can be used to facilitate this process."1 The emphasis is on obtaining the appropriate knowledge and skills for each level of training in perioperative TEE and not on the specific pathway that is used to achieve this goal. What is proposed in the Canadian guidelines is a reliable pathway with a concrete number of echocardiographic studies, continuing medical education (CME) hours and duration of training to produce a competent echocardiographer. In addition under "Grandfathering of established practitioners" we have recognized that "there are highly qualified practitioners actively engaged in perioperative TEE whose training did not follow the guidelines outlined in this document but who nonetheless have learned the techniques in other ways and have attained a high level of competence. It is not the intention of this document to prevent such individuals from practicing and providing important clinical care. It is hoped that this document will provide hospitals and regulatory committees general guidelines by which such nonstandard training can be evaluated."1 Expertise in TEE is difficult to achieve and mandates appropriate training to ensure that responsibilities are commensurate with the level of training.
References
1 Beique F, Ali M, Hynes M, et al. Canadian guidelines for training in adult perioperative transesophageal echocardiography. Can J Anesth 2006; 53: 1044–60.
2 Pearlman AS, Gardin JM, Martin RP, et al. Guidelines for optimal physician training in echocardiography. Recommendations of the American Society of Echocardiography Committee for Physician Training in Echocardiography. Am J Cardiol 1987; 60: 158–63.[Medline]
3 Stewart WJ, Aurigemma GP, Bierman FZ, et al. Guidelines for training in adult cardiovascular medicine. Core Cardiology Training Symposium (COCATS). Task Force 4: training in echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995; 25: 16–9.[Medline]
4 Quinones MA, Douglas PS, Foster E, et al. American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Clinical Competence Statement on Echocardiography: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/American College of Physicians – American Society of Internal Medicine Task Force on Clinical Competence. Circulation 2003; 107: 1068–89.
Related articles in CJA:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
