Dix conseils pour réussir la conception et la mise en œuvre d'un programme d’éducation médicale axée sur les compétences

Background: Globally there is a move to adopt competency-based medical education (CBME) at all levels of the medical training system. Implementation of a complex intervention such as CBME represents a marked paradigm shift involving multiple stakeholders. Methods: This article aims to share tips, based on review of the available literature and the authors’ experiences, that may help educators implementing CBME to more easily navigate this major undertaking and avoid “black ice” pitfalls that educators may encounter. Results: Careful planning prior to, during and post implementation will help programs transition successfully to CBME. Involvement of key stakeholders, such as trainees, teaching faculty, residency training committee members, and the program administrator, prior to and throughout implementation of CBME is critical. Careful and selective choice of key design elements including Entrustable Professional Activities, assessments and appropriate use of direct observation will enhance successful uptake of CBME. Pilot testing may help engage faculty and learners and identify logistical issues that may hinder implementation. Academic advisors, use of curriculum maps, and identifying and leveraging local resources may help facilitate implementation. Planned evaluation of CBME is important to ensure choices made during the design and implementation of CBME result in the desired outcomes. Conclusion: Although the transition to CBME is challenging, successful implementation can be facilitated by careful design and strategic planning.Contexte : Partout dans le monde, on observe une tendance en faveur de l’éducation médicale axée sur les compétences (EMAC) à tous les niveaux du système d’éducation médicale. Une intervention complexe comme l’élaboration d’un programme d’EMAC représente un important changement de paradigme qui nécessite l’implication de plusieurs parties prenantes. Méthode : L’objectif de cet article est de partager des conseils dégagés par les auteurs d’une revue de la littérature et de leur propre expérience afin d’aider les éducateurs à mieux s’orienter dans cette entreprise de taille qu’est la mise en œuvre de l’EMAC et à éviter les écueils. Résultats : Une planification minutieuse avant, pendant et après la transition des programmes vers l’EMAC contribue à garantir son succès. L'implication des principales parties prenantes, telles que les stagiaires, le corps enseignant, les membres du comité du programme de résidence et l'administrateur du programme, avant et pendant la mise en œuvre est essentielle. La sélection attentive des éléments clés, comme les activités professionnelles confiables, les évaluations et l'utilisation appropriée de l'observation directe, favorisera l'adoption de l’EMAC. Des tests pilotes peuvent permettre la participation du corps professoral et des apprenants, et à déceler les problèmes logistiques qui peuvent entraver la mise en œuvre. Les conseillers pédagogiques, le recours à la cartographie des programmes d'études et le repérage et la mobilisation de ressources locales peuvent faciliter la mise en œuvre des programmes d’EMAC. L’évaluation planifiée de ces programmes est importante pour garantir que les choix faits lors de leur conception et mise en œuvre aboutissent aux résultats souhaités. Conclusion : Puisque la transition vers l’EMAC peut comporter de nombreux défis, elle peut néanmoins être opérée avec succès grâce à une conception et une planification stratégique minutieuses

Tissue coverage of a hydrophilic polymer-coated zotarolimus-eluting stent vs. a fluoropolymer-coated everolimus-eluting stent at 13-month follow-up: an optical coherence tomography substudy from the RESOLUTE All Comers trial

Aims To compare the tissue coverage of a hydrophilic polymer-coated zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) vs. a fluoropolymer-coated everolimus-eluting stent (EES) at 13 months, using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in an ‘all-comers' population of patients, in order to clarify the mechanism of eventual differences in the biocompatibility and thrombogenicity of the devices. Methods and results Patients randomized to angiographic follow-up in the RESOLUTE All Comers trial (NCT00617084) at pre-specified OCT sites underwent OCT follow-up at 13 months. Tissue coverage and apposition were assessed strut by strut, and the results in both treatment groups were compared using multilevel logistic or linear regression, as appropriate, with clustering at three different levels: patient, lesion, and stent. Fifty-eight patients (30 ZES and 28 EES), 72 lesions, 107 stents, and 23 197 struts were analysed. Eight hundred and eighty-seven and 654 uncovered struts (7.4 and 5.8%, P= 0.378), and 216 and 161 malapposed struts (1.8 and 1.4%, P= 0.569) were found in the ZES and EES groups, respectively. The mean thickness of coverage was 116 ± 99 µm in ZES and 142 ± 113 µm in EES (P= 0.466). No differences in per cent neointimal volume obstruction (12.5 ± 7.9 vs. 15.0 ± 10.7%) or other areas-volumetric parameters were found between ZES and EES, respectively. Conclusion No significant differences in tissue coverage, malapposition, or lumen/stent areas and volumes were detected by OCT between the hydrophilic polymer-coated ZES and the fluoropolymer-coated EES at 13-month follow-u

Darwin -— an experimental astronomy mission to search for extrasolar planets

As a response to ESA call for mission concepts for its Cosmic Vision 2015–2025 plan, we propose a mission called Darwin. Its primary goal is the study of terrestrial extrasolar planets and the search for life on them. In this paper, we describe different characteristics of the instrument

ECCO essential requirements for quality cancer care : Oesophageal and gastric cancer

Background: ECCO essential requirements for quality cancer care (ERQCC) are checklists and explanations of organisation and actions that are necessary to give high-quality care to patients who have a specific type of cancer. They are written by European experts representing all disciplines involved in cancer care. ERQCC papers give oncology teams, patients, policymakers and managers an overview of the elements needed in any healthcare system to provide high quality of care throughout the patient journey. References are made to clinical guidelines and other resources where appropriate, and the focus is on care in Europe. Oesophageal and gastric: essential requirements for quality care: Oesophageal and gastric (OG) cancers are a challenging tumour group with a poor prognosis and wide variation in outcomes among European countries. Increasing numbers of older people are contracting the diseases, and treatments and care pathways are becoming more complex in both curative and palliative settings. High-quality care can only be a carried out in specialised OG cancer units or centres which have both a core multidisciplinary team and an extended team of allied professionals, and which are subject to quality and audit procedures. Such units or centres are far from universal in all European countries. It is essential that, to meet European aspirations for comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations implement the essential requirements in this paper, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis, to treatment, to survivorship. Conclusion: Taken together, the information presented in this paper provides a comprehensive description of the essential requirements for establishing a high-quality OG cancer service. The ERQCC expert group is aware that it is not possible to propose a one size fits all' system for all countries, but urges that access to multidisciplinary units or centres must be guaranteed for all those with OG cancer.Peer reviewe

ECCO Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care : Colorectal Cancer. A critical review

Background: ECCO essential requirements for quality cancer care (ERQCC) are checklists and explanations of organisation and actions that are necessary to give high-quality care to patients who have a specific tumour type. They are written by European experts representing all disciplines involved in cancer care. ERQCC papers give oncology teams, patients, policymakers and managers an overview of the elements needed in any healthcare system to provide high quality of care throughout the patient journey. References are made to clinical guidelines and other resources where appropriate, and the focus is on care in Europe. Colorectal cancer: essential requirements for quality care Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cause of cancer death in Europe and has wide variation in outcomes among countries. Increasing numbers of older people are contracting the disease, and treatments for advanced stages are becoming more complex. A growing number of survivors also require specialist support. High-quality care can only be a carried out in specialised CRC units or centres which have both a core multidisciplinary team and an extended team of allied professionals, and which are subject to quality and audit procedures. Such units or centres are far from universal in all European countries. It is essential that, to meet European aspirations for comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations implement the essential requirements in this paper, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis, to treatment, to survivorship. Conclusion: Taken together, the information presented in this paper provides a comprehensive description of the essential requirements for establishing a high-quality CRC service. The ECCO expert group is aware that it is not possible to propose a 'one size fits all' system for all countries, but urges that access to multidisciplinary units or centres must be guaranteed for all those with CRC. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.Peer reviewe

EURECCA colorectal: multidisciplinary mission statement on better care for patients with colon and rectal cancer in Europe

Background: Care for patients with colon and rectal cancer has improved in the last twenty years however still considerable variation exists in cancer management and outcome between European countries. Therefore, EURECCA, which is the acronym of European Registration of cancer care, is aiming at defining core treatment strategies and developing a European audit structure in order to improve the quality of care for all patients with colon and rectal cancer. In December 2012 the first multidisciplinary consensus conference about colon and rectum was held looking for multidisciplinary consensus. The expert panel consisted of representatives of European scientific organisations involved in cancer care of patients with colon and rectal cancer and representatives of national colorectal registries. Methods: The expert panel had delegates of the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO), European Society of Pathology (ESP), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Radiology (ESR), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), European CanCer Organisation (ECCO), European Oncology Nursing Society (EONS) and the European Colorectal Cancer Patient Organisation (EuropaColon), as well as delegates from national registries or audits. Experts commented and voted on the two web-based online voting rounds before the meeting (between 4th and 25th October and between the 20th November and 3rd December 2012) as well as one online round after the meeting (4th-20th March 2013) and were invited to lecture on the subjects during the meeting (13th-15th December 2012). The sentences in the consensus document were available during the meeting and a televoting round during the conference by all participants was performed. All sentences that were voted on are available on the EURECCA website www.canceraudit.eu. The consensus document was divided in sections describing evidence based algorithms of diagnostics, pathology, surgery, medical oncology, radiotherapy, and follow-up where applicable for treatment of colon cancer, rectal cancer and stage IV separately. Consensus was achieved using the Delphi method. Results: The total number of the voted sentences was 465. All chapters were voted on by at least 75% of the experts. Of the 465 sentences, 84% achieved large consensus, 6% achieved moderate consensus, and 7% resulted in minimum consensus. Only 3% was disagreed by more than 50% of the members. Conclusions: It is feasible to achieve European Consensus on key diagnostic and treatment issues using the Delphi method. This consensus embodies the expertise of professionals from all disciplines involved in the care for patients with colon and rectal cancer. Diagnostic and treatment algorithms were developed to implement the current evidence and to define core treatment guidance for multidisciplinary team management of colon and rectal cancer throughout Europe

Reception Test of Petals for the End Cap TEC+ of the CMS Silicon Strip Tracker

The silicon strip tracker of the CMS experiment has been completed and was inserted into the CMS detector in late 2007. The largest sub system of the tracker are its end caps, comprising two large end caps (TEC) each containing 3200 silicon strip modules. To ease construction, the end caps feature a modular design: groups of about 20 silicon modules are placed on sub-assemblies called petals and these self-contained elements are then mounted onto the TEC support structures. Each end cap consists of 144 such petals, which were built and fully qualified by several institutes across Europe. Fro

Integration of the End Cap TEC+ of the CMS Silicon Strip Tracker

The silicon strip tracker of the CMS experiment has been completed and inserted into the CMS detector in late 2007. The largest sub-system of the tracker is its end cap system, comprising two large end caps (TEC) each containing 3200 silicon strip modules. To ease construction, the end caps feature a modular design: groups of about 20 silicon modules are placed on sub-assemblies called petals and these self-contained elements are then mounted into the TEC support structures. Each end cap consists of 144 petals, and the insertion of these petals into the end cap structure is referred to as TEC integration. The two end caps were integrated independently in Aachen (TEC+) and at CERN (TEC--). This note deals with the integration of TEC+, describing procedures for end cap integration and for quality control during testing of integrated sections of the end cap and presenting results from the testing