Nuclear Medicine
Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada · 1.0 · 31 EPAs
Also available in French.
Every EPA in the published guide, shown as the form DebriefMD fills in, with its fields and answer options.
Transition to Discipline
TTD-1
Gathering and summarizing relevant clinical information for correlation with medical imaging
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the verification and application of the clinical skills of the medical school graduate in the setting of the practice of medical imaging - This includes gathering history, pertinent physical examination findings and results of relevant investigations from the clinical record and/or the patient, and summarizing it for presentation to a supervisor - This also includes using the dictation system to record a simple or normal report - This EPA may be observed in patients undergoing any nuclear medicine study - The observation of this EPA is divided into two parts: case review with a supervisor; and review of written/dictated documentation
Part A: Data synthesis Case review with nuclear medicine supervisor Use Form 1 Collect 2 observations of achievement Part B: Report dictation Review of report by supervisor Use Form 1 Collect 1 observation of achievement
Suggested observations: 2
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Medical Expert
- Part A: ME 2.2 Gather a relevant clinical history
- Part A: ME 2.2 Identify relevant findings of a physical examination
- Part A: ME 2.2 Interpret the findings of the history, physical examination and investigations in light of the clinical question
- Part A: ME 2.2 Synthesize and organize clinical information for clear and succinct presentation to supervisor
- Part B: ME 3.5 Use the digital system to retrieve images
- Part B: ME 3.5 Manipulate images to review a study
Communicator
- Part A: COM 2.3 Seek and integrate information from other sources
- Part B: COM 5.1 Apply a systematic method of reporting nuclear medicine studies
- Part B: COM 5.1 Use the radiology information system to issue a report
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
Foundations
F-1
Assessing patients with common medical or surgical presentations
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA ensures the Nuclear Medicine resident establishes the skills and knowledge of clinical medicine in order to effectively function as a Nuclear Medicine consultant for a wide variety of patients and conditions - This includes performing the clinical assessment, including history and physical exam, selecting and interpreting the results of investigations, and developing a differential diagnosis - It also includes the development of a basic treatment or management plan for common presentations - This EPA will be observed in the ambulatory or inpatient setting, with adult and pediatric patients, in a range of clinical conditions
Case review with supervisor (staff or senior resident) Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Presentation: cancer; cardiac; other medical; surgical - Pediatrics: no; yes Collect 7 observations - At least 1 of each type of presentation - At least 1 pediatric
Suggested observations: 7
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Presentation
- cancer
- cardiac
- other medical
- surgical
Pediatrics
- no
- yes
Medical Expert
- ME 2.2 Gather a relevant clinical history
- ME 2.2 Perform a physical exam that informs the diagnosis
- ME 2.2 Select and/or interpret investigations
- ME 2.2 Formulate a basic differential diagnosis
- ME 2.2 Synthesize and organize clinical information for clear and succinct presentation to supervisor
- ME 2.4 Identify and/or monitor key clinical features in the implementation of a management plan
Communicator
- COM 2.1 Use patient-centred interviewing skills
- COM 3.1 Convey information to the patient and/or family clearly and compassionately
- COM 5.1 Document the essential elements of a clinical encounter using a structured approach
Collaborator
- COL 1.2 Work effectively as a member of the clinical team
Professional
- P 1.1 Complete assigned responsibilities
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
F-2
Identifying and assessing unstable patients, providing initial management, and obtaining help
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA includes recognizing serious, life-threatening or critical illness, implementing initial emergent care, and obtaining assistance - This EPA does not include leading a resuscitation team beyond initial care (i.e. not entrusted with diagnosing etiologies or ongoing management)
Direct observation and/or case review by supervisor (MRP, other consulting staff, senior resident) Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Presentation: acute respiratory distress; allergic reactions; altered level of consciousness; chest pain; hemodynamic instability; hypoglycemia; other presentation Collect 5 observations of achievement - At least 4 of the case mix
Suggested observations: 5
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Presentation
- acute respiratory distress
- allergic reactions
- altered level of consciousness
- chest pain
- hemodynamic instability
- hypoglycemia
- other presentation
Medical Expert
- ME 2.1 Recognize instability and medical acuity in a clinical presentation
- ME 2.1 Determine the acuity of the issue and the priorities for patient care
- ME 2.2 Provide assessment and initial stabilization of ABCs
- ME 2.2 Perform a history and physical exam relevant to the patient presentation, in a time-effective manner
- ME 2.2 Select and/or interpret investigations
- ME 2.4 Develop and implement initial management plans
- ME 4.1 Determine the appropriate disposition and/or setting for ongoing care
Communicator
- COM 5.1 Document the clinical encounter to adequately convey clinical reasoning and the rationale for decisions
Collaborator
- COL 1.2 Consult as needed with other health care professionals, including other physicians
Professional
- P 1.1 Work within personal limitations, seeking assistance as needed
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
F-3
Advising on the selection and timing of Nuclear Medicine examinations
Key features and assessment plan
- This focus of this EPA is the role of Nuclear Medicine specialists as consultants regarding investigation of clinical questions using radiopharmaceuticals - This EPA includes gathering the needed clinical information about the request and synthesizing clinical data with results of other investigations to develop an understanding of the clinical question and make recommendations about selection, sequence and/or timing of further investigation - The observation of this EPA is based on the review of a single request with the supervisor
Review of an imaging request with supervisor Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Setting: emergency; inpatient; ambulatory - Case mix: oncology; infectious; renal; endocrine; cardiac; other condition - Test requested: bone scan; V/Q scan; HIDA scan; renal scan; MIBI; thyroid scan; scan for GI bleed; PET scan; other test - Test selection modified: yes; no Collect 8 observations of achievement - At least 1 from each setting - At least 3 different examples of the case mix - At least 5 different tests - At least 3 tests that were modified - At least 2 assessors
Suggested observations: 8
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Setting
- emergency
- inpatient
- ambulatory
Case mix
- oncology
- infectious
- renal
- endocrine
- cardiac
- other condition
Test requested
- bone scan
- V/Q scan
- HIDA scan
- renal scan
- MIBI
- thyroid scan
- scan for GI bleed
- PET scan
- other test
Test selection modified
- yes
- no
Medical Expert
- ME 2.2 Correlate prior investigations, including the results of relevant laboratory investigations and imaging
- ME 2.2 Integrate and synthesize patient information to establish the clinical question
- ME 2.4 Apply diagnostic algorithms for the investigation of conditions examined by nuclear medicine techniques
- ME 2.4 Advise referring physicians on the most appropriate selection, sequence and/or timing of further investigation(s)
Communicator
- COM 2.3 Gather patient information from another health professional
Collaborator
- COL 1.1 Establish positive relationships with other members of the health care team
- COL 1.3 Communicate effectively with physicians and other health care professionals
- COL 1.3 Support clinical colleagues in the development and implementation of a management plan
- COL 1.4 Work with technical and other staff to address patient issues and ensure appropriate medical care
Health Advocate
- HA 1.1 Respond to individual patient diagnostic needs and issues as part of patient care
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
F-4
Advising on the performance of common Nuclear Medicine examinations
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA includes selecting the protocol for the examination, and monitoring and adjusting the process of the examination - This may include adjusting the examination as needed, such as requesting additional views or using additional pharmaceuticals (e.g. diuretics, sedatives) - This EPA will include non-imaging studies as well as single photon (various tracers) and PET imaging - The observation of this EPA is based on the review of a single request with the supervisor
Direct observation by supervisor Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Case mix: oncology; infectious; renal; endocrine; cardiac; MSK; pulmonary; GI; neuro; other condition - Test requested: bone scan; V/Q scan; HIDA scan; renal scan; MIBI; thyroid scan; scan for GI bleed; PET scan; non-imaging; other test - Pharmacologic intervention: yes; no - Additional views: yes; no Collect 10 observations of achievement - At least 4 from case mix - At least 6 different tests - At least 2 with pharmacologic intervention - At least 5 requesting additional views
Suggested observations: 10
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Case mix
- oncology
- infectious
- renal
- endocrine
- cardiac
- MSK
- pulmonary
- GI
- neuro
- other condition
Test requested
- bone scan
- V/Q scan
- HIDA scan
- renal scan
- MIBI
- thyroid scan
- scan for GI bleed
- PET scan
- non-imaging
- other test
Pharmacologic intervention
- yes
- no
Additional views
- yes
- no
Medical Expert
- ME 2.2 Gather clinical data from the patient and other sources
- ME 2.2 Correlate prior investigations, including the results of relevant laboratory investigations and imaging
- ME 2.2 Integrate and synthesize patient information to establish the clinical question
- ME 2.2 Formulate a basic differential diagnosis
- ME 3.5 Select the protocol for common nuclear medicine examinations
- ME 3.5 Review images to assess adequacy to answer the clinical question
- ME 3.5 Modify or optimize the exam, as needed
- ME 3.5 Determine that the examination is complete
Communicator
- COM 1.2 Optimize patient comfort
Collaborator
- COL 1.4 Work with technical and other staff to address patient needs and the clinical question
Health Advocate
- HA 1.1 Respond to individual patient diagnostic needs and issues as part of patient care
- HA 1.3 Adapt the examination as needed to limit radiation exposure
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
F-5
Identifying and interpreting common and critical findings in CT imaging studies
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the application of the knowledge of cross-sectional anatomy and CT imaging technique to address the clinical question - This includes identification of normal anatomy and its variants as well as findings significant to the patient’s care, diagnosis of common findings and recognition of critical findings that warrant communication with the referring physician - The activities of this EPA include preparing a report but, at this stage, achievement of independence in dictation of a report is not required
Image review with supervisor (DR or NM) of a batch of live cases Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Number of studies reviewed (write in): - Body system (select all that apply): head and neck; chest; abdo/pelvis; MSK; neuro - Case mix (select all that apply): infectious; oncology; trauma; other condition - Number with critical findings (write in): Collect 6 observations of achievement - A variety of body systems and case mix - At least 2 instances of critical findings - At least 3 different supervisors - At least 1 diagnostic radiology supervisor
Suggested observations: 6
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Medical Expert
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of cross-sectional anatomy
- ME 3.5 Assess the quality and validity of the study, and any impact on the diagnostic interpretation
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of the technical components of diagnostic testing including equipment and protocols
- ME 3.5 Demonstrate a methodological approach to the interpretation of diagnostic testing
- ME 3.5 Recognize normal variants, artefacts and imaging pitfalls
- ME 3.5 Identify key findings and common significant incidental findings
- ME 2.2 Formulate a basic differential diagnosis
- ME 3.5 Correlate findings with clinical information and other imaging modalities
- ME 2.4 Provide suggestions for further testing and/or patient disposition as relevant
- ME 3.5 Interpret findings of cross-sectional imaging in the context of the clinical question
- ME 4.1 Recognize and respond to situations or results that warrant verbal reporting to the referring physician
Communicator
- COM 5.1 Prepare a report for presentation to a supervisor
Collaborator
- COL 1.4 Work with technical staff to optimize the study and/or request additional reconstructions
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
F-6
Identifying and interpreting common and critical findings in Nuclear Medicine examinations
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on applying knowledge of radiopharmaceuticals, physiology and pathophysiology to answer clinical questions in NM examinations - This includes interpretation of the NM study, correlation with clinical assessment, laboratory tests and other imaging, as relevant, and identification of findings significant to the patient’s care, diagnosis of common findings and generation of all elements of a report (description of findings, differential diagnosis, recommendations) - This EPA includes recognizing when a finding is critical to the ongoing status and/or care of the patient - This EPA includes common basic NM examinations, examples include: bone scan, V/Q scan, HIDA scan, renal scan, myocardial perfusion, thyroid scan, scan for GI bleed
Image review with supervisor of a day’s batch of cases Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Number of studies reviewed (write in): - Case mix (select all that apply): cardiac; endocrine; GI; infectious; MSK; neuro; oncology; pulmonary; renal; trauma; other condition - Test reviewed (select all that apply): non-imaging; bone scan; scan for GI bleed; HIDA scan; infectious scan; myocardial perfusion; PET scan; renal scan; thyroid scan; V/Q scan; other test - Number with critical findings (write in): Collect 10 observations of achievement - A variety of case mix - At least 2 each of bone, HIDA, infectious, myocardial perfusion, renal, and V/Q scan - At least 6 studies with critical findings - At least 3 different supervisors
Suggested observations: 10
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Medical Expert
- ME 2.2 Integrate and synthesize patient information to establish the clinical question
- ME 3.5 Assess the quality and validity of the study, and any impact on the diagnostic interpretation
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of the technical components of diagnostic testing including equipment and protocols
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of the principles of the use of in vivo and in vitro radionuclides and radiopharmaceuticals for imaging and non-imaging studies
- ME 3.5 Demonstrate a methodological approach to the interpretation of diagnostic testing
- ME 3.5 Identify key findings and common significant incidental findings
- ME 3.5 Recognize normal variants, artefacts and imaging pitfalls
- ME 2.2 Formulate a basic differential diagnosis
- ME 3.5 Correlate findings with clinical information and other imaging modalities
- ME 3.5 Interpret findings of cross-sectional imaging, in the context of the clinical question
- ME 2.4 Provide suggestions for further testing and/or patient disposition as relevant
- ME 4.1 Recognize and respond to situations or results that warrant verbal reporting to the referring physician
Communicator
- COM 5.1 Generate a clear, concise report that enhances patient management
Professional
- P 1.1 Work within personal limitations, seeking assistance as needed
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
F-7
Communicating effectively with referring physicians about urgent NM examinations and/or critical findings
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on communication and collaboration with other physicians - This includes establishing rapport, clearly conveying NM expertise and recommendations, answering questions and working together to provide optimal patient care - This EPA may be observed with any type of nuclear medicine study
Direct observation by supervisor, and review of documented verbal report Use Form 1. Form collects information on - Type of study (write in): Collect 3 observations of achievement - At least 3 different studies - At least 2 assessors
Suggested observations: 3
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Medical Expert
- ME 4.1 Recognize and respond to situations or results that warrant verbal reporting to the referring physician
- ME 3.5 Summarize findings, and provide suggestions for further testing and /or patient disposition as relevant
- ME 1.6 Demonstrate insight into their own limits of expertise
Communicator
- COM 5.1 Document in the imaging report actions taken to communicate significant or unexpected findings
Collaborator
- COL 1.3 Convey information to clinicians in a manner that enhances patient management
Professional
- P 1.1 Exhibit appropriate professional behaviours
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
F-8
Recognizing and initiating a response to radiation safety incidents
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the NM resident’s role as a nuclear energy worker and a leader in ensuring radiation safety procedures are followed - This EPA includes identifying a radiation safety incident has occurred, and initiating procedures to contain or mitigate risk to person, patient and/or staff - These events may occur in the NM department, off-site in an uncontrolled environment (e.g. patient’s home), or be simulated - This does not include responsibility for the management of the response to the event. This is an expectation of the Core stage
Direct observation by radiation safety officer, supervisor, nuclear medicine physicist or technologist Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Event: on-site; off-site; simulated - Isotope (write in): - Skin contamination: yes; no Collect 1 observation of achievement
Suggested observations: 1
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Event
- on-site
- off-site
- simulated
Medical Expert
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of radiation safety, protection and associated regulations as applied to the safe use and transportation of radioisotopes and radiopharmaceuticals
- ME 5.1 Recognize and respond to a safety event in a timely manner
- ME 5.1 Initiate procedures to contain or mitigate risk to person, patient and/or staff
- ME 1.6 Seek assistance, as needed
- ME 5.1 Identify the nature of the radiation safety event
Collaborator
- COL 1.2 Apply knowledge of the role of the radiation safety officer
- COL 1.4 Work with staff to ensure patient, technologist and personal safety
Leader
- L 3.1 Demonstrate responsibility for radiation safety
Professional
- P 1.1 Adhere to procedures for the management of the nature of the specific radiation incident
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
F-9
Working effectively with the interprofessional NM team
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the role of the NM specialist as a member of an interprofessional team that may include other physicians, physicists, nurses, and technologists, among others - This includes communicating and working effectively with other team members, exhibiting professional behaviours and responding to requests for guidance
Multiple observers provide feedback individually, which is then collated to one report Use Form 3. Form collects information on: - Observer role: NM physician; NM physicist; nurse; technologist; other physician/surgeon; other residents or students; other Collect feedback on interprofessional interactions on 1 occasion during Foundations - At least 5 observers - At least 2 NM physicians - At least 1 technologist - At least 1 respondent with another observer role
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Observer role
- NM physician
- NM physicist
- nurse
- technologist
- other physician/surgeon
- other residents or students
- other
Collaborator
- COL 1.2 Demonstrate an understanding of the scope and expertise of other health care professionals
- COL 1.3 Communicate effectively with physicians and other health care professionals
- COL 1.4 Provide guidance to resolve clinical or imaging challenges
Health Advocate
- HA 1.1 Facilitate timely patient access to services and resources
Professional
- P 1.1 Respond punctually to requests from patients or other health care professionals
- P 1.1 Exhibit appropriate professional behaviours
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
Core
C-1
Protocolling, preparing and triaging requests for NM diagnostic services
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the work of a NM specialist to review, discuss, plan and prepare for the delivery of radiopharmaceutical based investigations - This includes gathering information about the patient condition and purpose of the request, advising on NM studies, triaging the urgency of the request and demonstrating stewardship of NM resources - At this stage, this includes consideration of complex cases, such as pediatric dosing, lactating or pregnant patients, patients with renal insufficiency, patients with pulmonary hypertension, medication conflicts, etc. - The observation of this EPA is based on review of a day’s set of imaging requests
Review of a day’s set of requests with supervisor Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Number of requests reviewed (write in): - Case mix (select all that apply): cardiac; endocrine; GI; infectious; MSK; neuro; oncology; pulmonary; renal; trauma; other condition - Request (select all that apply): general NM; complex NM; cardiac; PET - Number of pediatric cases (write in): - Number of complex cases (write in): - Reason for case complexity (write in): Collect 5 observations of achievement - At least 5 of the case mix - At least 2 examples of type of request - At least 5 pediatric cases - At least 10 complex cases - At least 2 different supervisors
Suggested observations: 5
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Medical Expert
- ME 2.2 Gather and synthesize patient information to establish the clinical question
- ME 2.2 Correlate prior investigations, including the results of relevant laboratory investigations and imaging
- ME 2.1 Recognize and respond to circumstances that require direct communication with the referring physician
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of diagnostic algorithms for investigation and the role of nuclear medicine imaging
- ME 2.2 Identify patient factors that may affect the choice of examination or study protocol
- ME 2.4 Modify and/or customize the request as needed
- ME 2.4 Determine the priority of the request, and triage the examination
- ME 2.4 Use pharmacologic agents or techniques to intentionally modify radiopharmaceutical distribution or excretion
- ME 2.4 Modify and/or customize nuclear medicine studies, with consideration of the patient’s specific needs
Collaborator
- COL 1.4 Communicate effectively with technical staff about the urgency and/or customization of nuclear medicine studies
Leader
- L 2.1 Consult with technical staff to judiciously allocate radiopharmaceutical and imaging resources
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-2
Supervising, optimizing and interpreting single photon NM examinations
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA includes all aspects of the conduct and interpretation of diagnostic NM examinations - The focus of this EPA is the application and integration of physiology, pathophysiology, radiation sciences, image acquisition, clinical knowledge and skills to solve clinical questions - The observation of this EPA is based on a day’s workload of examinations
Review of a day’s work with supervisor Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Number of studies reviewed (write in): - Number of SPECT/CT (write in): - Number of pediatric patients (write in): - Case mix (select all that apply): endocrine; GI; infectious; MSK; neuro; oncology; pulmonary; renal; trauma; other condition - Test reviewed (select all that apply): non-imaging; BMD; bone scan; endocrine; GI; GU; infectious scan; V/Q scan; SPECT/CT; other test Collect 10 observations of achievement - At least 20 SPECT/CT studies over all the observations - At least 20 pediatric patients over all the observations - Breadth of case mix - Breadth of all tests, including BMD - At least 5 observers
Suggested observations: 10
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Medical Expert
- ME 2.2 Gather and synthesize patient information to establish the clinical question
- ME 3.5 Correlate prior investigations, including the results of relevant laboratory investigations and imaging
- ME 2.2 Perform a focused history and/or examination to gather additional clinical information
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of the principles of the use of in vivo and in vitro radionuclides and radiopharmaceuticals for imaging and non-imaging studies
- ME 3.5 Use computer applications to optimize the images and/or views needed in order to answer the clinical question
- ME 3.5 Recognize normal variants, artefacts and imaging pitfalls
- ME 3.5 Assess the quality and validity of the study, and any impact on the diagnostic interpretation
- ME 5.1 Recognize and manage adverse events and emergency conditions requiring urgent medical attention
- ME 3.5 Identify all relevant findings
Communicator
- COM 5.1 Provide clear, concise, accurate and grammatically correct reports of diagnostic testing in a timely fashion
Collaborator
- COL 1.4 Work with technical staff to solve imaging challenges and optimize the quality of examinations
Scholar
- S 3.4 Integrate best evidence and clinical expertise
Professional
- P 1.1 Work within personal limitations, seeking assistance as needed
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-3
Supervising, optimizing and interpreting hybrid PET imaging
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA includes all aspects of the conduct and interpretation of hybrid PET imaging, and highlights the unique aspects of this diagnostic technique - The focus of this EPA is the application and integration of physiology, pathophysiology, radiation sciences, image acquisition, and clinical knowledge and skills to solve clinical questions - This includes recognizing and interpreting relevant findings on cross-sectional imaging - The observation of this EPA is based on a day’s workload of hybrid examinations
Image review of a day’s work with supervisor Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Number of studies reviewed (write in): - Number of pediatric patients (write in): - Case mix (select all that apply): cardiac; inflammatory/infectious; neuro; oncology; other condition - Tracer: FDG; other Collect 10 observations of achievement - At least 5 pediatric patients - The full breadth of case mix - At least 3 observers
Suggested observations: 10
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Medical Expert
- ME 2.2 Gather and synthesize patient information to establish the clinical question
- ME 3.5 Correlate prior investigations, including the results of relevant laboratory investigations and imaging
- ME 2.2 Perform a focused history and/or examination to gather additional clinical information
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of the pitfalls and artefacts unique to hybrid imaging, including registration and attenuation correction
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of the principles of the use of PET radionuclides and radiopharmaceuticals for imaging studies
- ME 2.4 Use pharmacologic agents or techniques to intentionally modify radiopharmaceutical distribution or excretion
- ME 3.5 Use computer applications to optimize the images and/or views needed in order to answer the clinical question
- ME 3.5 Recognize normal variants, artefacts and imaging pitfalls
- ME 3.5 Identify all relevant findings
- ME 3.5 Assess the quality and validity of the study, and any impact on the diagnostic interpretation
- ME 5.1 Recognize and manage adverse events and emergency conditions requiring urgent medical attention
Communicator
- COM 5.1 Provide clear, concise, accurate and grammatically correct reports of diagnostic testing in a timely fashion
Collaborator
- COL 1.4 Work with technical staff to solve imaging challenges and optimize the quality of examinations
Scholar
- S 3.4 Integrate best evidence and clinical expertise
Professional
- P 1.1 Work within personal limitations, seeking assistance as needed
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-4
Providing reports of NM examinations
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the communication skills of documenting the findings of NM examinations - This includes generating an accurate and concise report, and recommending appropriate management, next steps and/or follow-up - The achievement of this EPA requires competence across the breadth of NM examinations, including some cases with diagnostic uncertainty or complexity
Review of a batch of imaging reports by nuclear medicine supervisor Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Number of reports reviewed (write in): - Type of study (select all that apply): general; hybrid; PET; cardiac - Number of cases with diagnostic uncertainty/complexity (write in): Collect 5 observations of achievement - At least 1 of each type of study in the overall mix - At least 5 cases with diagnostic uncertainty or complexity in the overall mix - At least 3 different observers
Suggested observations: 5
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Medical Expert
- ME 3.5 Summarize findings of clinical relevance
- ME 3.5 Generate an appropriate differential and most likely diagnosis
- ME 2.4 Provide suggestions for further testing and/or patient disposition as relevant
Communicator
- COM 5.1 Use a systematic method of reporting, integrating clinical and imaging information
- COM 5.1 Provide clear, concise, accurate and grammatically correct reports of diagnostic testing in a timely fashion
- COM 5.1 Communicate critical results urgently, as needed
Collaborator
- COL 1.3 Convey information to clinicians in a manner that enhances patient management
- COL 1.3 Convey diagnostic uncertainty, as needed
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-5
Recognizing and interpreting relevant findings on cross-sectional imaging
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the application of the knowledge of cross-sectional anatomy and imaging techniques to address the clinical question, as well as identification of common key findings and significant common incidental findings - This EPA demonstrates the level of skill required to do hybrid imaging - This EPA will be observed in diagnostic radiology rotations
Image review with supervisor of a batch of cases Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Number of studies reviewed (write in): - Number of CT studies (write in): - Body system (select all that apply): head and neck; chest; abdo/pelvis; neuro; MSK - Type of study (select all that apply): CT; CT with contrast; MR - Case mix (select all that apply): infectious; oncology; trauma; other condition Collect 10 observations of achievement - All body systems and types of case mix - At least 80% CT for head and neck, chest and abdo/pelvis studies - At least 5 different observers
Suggested observations: 10
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Medical Expert
- ME 3.5 Demonstrate a methodological approach to the interpretation of diagnostic testing
- ME 3.5 Assess the quality and validity of the study, and any impact on the diagnostic interpretation
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of the technical components of diagnostic testing including equipment and protocols
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of cross-sectional anatomy
- ME 3.5 Recognize normal variants, artefacts and imaging pitfalls
- ME 3.5 Identify all relevant findings
- ME 3.5 Generate an appropriate differential and most likely diagnosis
- ME 2.4 Provide suggestions for further testing and/or patient disposition as relevant
Communicator
- COM 5.1 Use a systematic method of reporting, integrating clinical and imaging information
- COM 5.1 Provide clear, concise, accurate and grammatically correct reports of diagnostic testing in a timely fashion
- COM 5.1 Communicate critical results urgently, as needed
Collaborator
- COL 1.4 Work with technical staff to optimize the study and/or request additional reconstructions
- COL 1.3 Convey information to clinicians in a manner that enhances patient management
- COL 1.3 Convey diagnostic uncertainty, as needed
Scholar
- S 3.4 Integrate best evidence and clinical expertise
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-6
Assessing patients for treatment with radiopharmaceuticals, and developing a treatment plan
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the integration of clinical assessment and investigations to assess eligibility for treatment with radiopharmaceuticals, as well as development of a treatment plan, including any dosimetry required - This EPA may include, but is not limited to, the following clinical conditions: thyrotoxicosis, thyroid cancer, bone metastases and targeted cancer therapy - This EPA includes effective communication with the patient and family in the discussion of consent - The observation of this EPA is divided into three parts: assessment for eligibility of treatment; informed consent discussion; and development of treatment plan
Part A: Assessment for eligibility Case review with nuclear medicine supervisor Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Condition: benign; malignant - Pediatric patient: no; yes - Complex case: yes; no - Proposed therapy (write in): - Eligible for therapy: yes; not at this time; no Collect 7 observations of achievement - At least 2 benign - At least 3 malignant - At least 1 complex case - At least 3 iodine 131 - At least 2 other therapies - At least 1 not eligible or not at this time Part B: Informed consent discussion Direct observation with nuclear medicine supervisor Use Form 1 Collect 2 observations of achievement - At least 2 assessors Part C: Development of treatment plan Review of treatment plan by supervisor Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Condition: malignant; benign - Pediatric patient: no; yes - Complex case: yes; no - Proposed therapy (write in): - Setting of therapy: inpatient; outpatient Collect 5 observations of achievement - At least 1 benign - At least 3 malignant - At least 2 complex cases - At least 2 iodine 131 - At least 2 other therapies
Suggested observations: 7
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Condition
- benign
- malignant
Pediatric patient
- no
- yes
Complex case
- yes
- no
Medical Expert
- Part A: ME 2.2 Gather a relevant clinical history
- Part A: ME 2.2 Perform a physical exam that informs the diagnosis
- Part A: ME 2.2 Correlate prior investigations, including the results of relevant laboratory investigations and imaging
- Part A: ME 2.2 Select and/or interpret additional investigations, as needed
- Part A: ME 2.2 Synthesize patient information to assess eligibility for therapeutic nuclear medicine intervention
- Part A: ME 3.3 Triage therapy, taking into account clinical urgency, potential for deterioration, and available resources
- Part A: ME 2.2 Gather information about the patient’s home, mobility and access to care
- Part A: ME 2.4 Develop plans for radiation protection and radiation safety following therapeutic intervention
- Part B: ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of the natural history, clinical manifestations and management of conditions treatment by nuclear medicine techniques
- Part B: ME 3.2 Explain the risks, benefits and adverse effects of, and alternatives and rationale for a proposed therapy
- Part C: ME 2.4 Integrate nuclear medicine therapy into the overall plan of the patient’s care
- Part C: ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of radiation biology pertinent to therapeutic uses of radionuclides
- Part C: ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of radiation dosimetry
- Part C: ME 3.6 Determine the radiopharmaceutical choice and efficacy
- Part C: ME 3.6 Calculate the administered dose, integrating knowledge of internal dosimetry, radiation protection and radiation safety
- Part C: ME 2.2 Identify patient factors that may affect the dose and/or distribution of the radioactive agent
- Part C: ME 3.3 Triage therapy, taking into account clinical urgency, potential for deterioration, and available resources
- Part C: ME 2.4 Develop a plan for therapeutic intervention using a radionuclide and/or radiopharmaceutical, taking into account the patient’s specific needs
- Part C: ME 4.1 Develop plans for the ongoing care of a patient who has received therapy with a radionuclide or radiopharmaceutical
- Part C: ME 4.1 Determine the need and timing of referral to another physician, including radiologists and/or oncologists as relevant
Communicator
- Part A: COM 3.1 Convey information about diagnosis and prognosis to the patient and/or family clearly and compassionately
- Part B: COM 3.1 Convey information about diagnosis and prognosis to the patient and/or family clearly and compassionately
- Part B: COM 3.1 Convey the concept of relative risk, as it applies to radiation exposure, in discussion of treatment
- Part B: COM 4.3 Use effective communication skills and strategies, such as body posture, language at the appropriate level, and periodic checks for understanding
- Part B: COM 2.1 Actively listen and respond to patient cues
- Part B: COM 4.3 Answer questions from a patient and family
- Part B: COM 5.1 Document the consent discussion in an accurate and complete manner
Health Advocate
- Part A: HA 1.1 Facilitate timely patient access to services and resources
- Part B: HA 1.3 Counsel the patient and family about post therapy restrictions
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-7
Administering unsealed source nuclear medicine therapy
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the use of radiopharmaceuticals in the treatment of patients with a variety of conditions - This includes verification of the treatment dose, safe administration, management of any adverse effects or complications, and implementation of a plan for discharge and/or follow-up - Radiation safety of the unsealed source, for the patient, family, staff and others, is an important aspect of this EPA, including before, during and after administration - The observation of this EPA is divided into two parts: administration of therapy; oversight of treatment
Part A: Safe administration Direct observation by technologist or supervisor Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Route of administration: oral; parenteral Collect 2 observations of achievement - At least 1 parenteral Part B: Overseeing treatment Case review by supervisor Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Condition: benign; malignant - Disposition: inpatient; home; other facility - Complex case: yes; no Collect 2 observations of achievement - At least 1 malignant - At least 1 complex case
Suggested observations: 2
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Route of administration
- oral
- parenteral
Medical Expert
- Part A: ME 2.2 Perform a focused clinical assessment
- Part A: ME 2.2 Assess the patient’s suitability to proceed with unsealed source therapy
- Part A: ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of radiation safety, protection and associated regulations as applied to the safe use and transportation of radioisotopes and radiopharmaceuticals
- Part A: ME 5.2 Use appropriate personal protective measures
- Part A: ME 3.5 Demonstrate safe handling of radionuclides and radiopharmaceuticals
- Part A: ME 3.6 Verify patient identity and treatment dose
- Part A: ME 5.2 Limit unnecessary radiation exposure to patient and staff
- Part A: ME 3.6 Manage immediate complications, as relevant
- Part B: ME 2.2 Perform a focused clinical assessment
- Part B: ME 2.2 Assess the patient’s suitability to proceed with unsealed source therapy
- Part B: ME 3.6 Supervise the administration of unsealed source therapy
- Part B: ME 3.5 Monitor patient comfort and safety, and adjust the procedure as needed
- Part B: ME 3.6 Manage immediate complications, as relevant
- Part B: ME 4.1 Establish a plan for discharge and/or decommissioning
- Part B: ME 4.1 Establish a plan for ongoing care, monitoring response to treatment, further investigations and/or further intervention
Communicator
- Part B: COM 4.3 Answer questions from a patient and family
Collaborator
- Part A: COL 1.2 Work effectively with the team providing unsealed source therapy
Health Advocate
- Part B: HA 1.3 Counsel the patient and family about post therapy restrictions
Professional
- Part A: P 1.1 Work within personal limitations, seeking assistance as needed
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-8
Providing clinical follow-up for patients who have received unsealed source therapy
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the care provided after initial therapeutic use of radiopharmaceuticals in a course of therapy - This EPA includes, as relevant, identification, assessment and management of any complications, assessment of treatment efficacy, and assessment of readiness and appropriateness of the next course of treatment, and referral to other physicians for ongoing treatment - This EPA may be observed in any clinical setting
Case review with supervisor Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Type of therapy (write in): - Unexpected finding: no; yes - Change of therapeutic plan: no; yes Collect 3 observations of achievement
Suggested observations: 3
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Medical Expert
- ME 2.2 Perform a focused clinical assessment
- ME 2.2 Interpret the results of investigations performed to monitor the condition and/or treatment
- ME 2.2 Identify adverse effects of unsealed source therapy
- ME 2.2 Synthesize patient information to determine response to treatment and/or toxicity of therapy
- ME 4.1 Establish a plan for ongoing care, monitoring response to treatment, further investigations and/or further intervention
- ME 4.1 Determine the need and timing of referral to another physician, including radiologists and/or oncologists as relevant
Communicator
- COM 3.1 Convey information to the patient and/or family clearly and compassionately
- COM 4.3 Answer questions from a patient and family
Scholar
- S 3.4 Integrate best evidence and clinical expertise
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-9
Performing the procedures of Nuclear Medicine
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA includes explaining the procedure and procedure-specific risks and benefits, obtaining informed consent, preparing the sterile field with local anesthetic injection for invasive procedures, and safe handling of radiopharmaceuticals - This EPA may be observed in any nuclear medicine procedure
Direct observation by supervisor Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Procedure: sentinel node injections; lymphoscintigraphy; VP shunt injections; venipuncture; bladder catheterization; other procedure Collect 5 observations of achievement - At least 1 sentinel node injection - At least 1 lymphoscintigraphy
Suggested observations: 5
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Procedure
- sentinel node injections
- lymphoscintigraphy
- VP shunt injections
- venipuncture
- bladder catheterization
- other procedure
Medical Expert
- ME 3.2 Obtain and document informed consent, explaining the risks and rationale for the procedure
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of key anatomic relationships
- ME 3.4 Gather and/or manage the availability of appropriate instruments and materials
- ME 3.4 Select and provide sedation and local analgesia, as appropriate
- ME 3.4 Position the patient appropriately
- ME 3.4 Demonstrate aseptic technique: skin preparation; draping; establishing and respecting the sterile field; hand cleanse, gown and glove
- ME 3.4 Perform procedures in a skillful and safe manner
- ME 3.4 Monitor patient comfort and safety, and adjust the procedure as needed
- ME 3.4 Recognize and manage immediate complications
Communicator
- COM 5.1 Document the procedure
Collaborator
- COL 1.2 Communicate effectively with nurses, technical staff and/or assistants during the procedure
Professional
- P 1.1 Work within personal limitations, seeking assistance as needed
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-10
Supervising nuclear cardiac stress tests
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on an assessment of suitability to proceed with the planned investigation, selection and/or modification of the exam protocol (as relevant), supervision of the procedure and management of any complications
Direct observation of a case by supervisor (NM physician, cardiologist or internist) Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Category: exercise; persantine; dobutamine - Study stopped/altered due to patient factors: yes; no Collect 10 observations of achievement - At least 3 exercise - At least 3 persantine - At least 1 dobutamine - At least 2 stopped or altered - At least 3 observers
Suggested observations: 10
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Category
- exercise
- persantine
- dobutamine
Study stopped/altered due to patient factors
- yes
- no
Medical Expert
- ME 2.2 Assess a patient’s suitability to proceed with cardiac stress testing
- ME 3.1 Select the protocol relevant to the clinical question and patient condition
- ME 3.2 Obtain and document informed consent, explaining the risks and the rationale for the procedure
- ME 3.5 Monitor patient comfort and safety, and adjust the procedure as needed
- ME 3.5 Modify or adjust the procedure to optimize study quality, as needed
- ME 3.4 Recognize and manage immediate complications
Communicator
- COM 5.1 Communicate critical results urgently, as needed
Collaborator
- COL 1.2 Communicate effectively with nurses, technical staff and/or assistants during the procedure
Professional
- P 1.1 Work within personal limitations, seeking assistance as needed
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-11
Providing interpretation of nuclear cardiology examinations
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA includes interpretation and reporting of the findings of nuclear cardiology examinations and management of any critical findings - This includes stress testing, myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT and PET), MUGA and infection/infiltrative/inflammatory cardiac imaging - The observations of myocardial perfusion studies and MUGA studies must be based on real patients (live cases); the observations of viability and infiltration/inflammation/infection studies may be based on real patients (this is preferred) or a teaching file of studies
Image review with NM supervisor of a day’s batch of cases or teaching file Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Number of live myocardial perfusion studies (write in): - Number of live or teaching file viability studies (write in): - Number of live or teaching file infiltration/inflammation/infection studies (write in): - Number of live MUGA studies (write in): - Technique (select all that apply): single photon; PET - Number of patients with a critical cardiac finding (write in): Collect 10 observations of achievement - At least 2 studies for viability with abnormal findings - At least 2 studies for infiltration/inflammation/infection with abnormal findings - At least 3 patients with critical cardiac findings
Suggested observations: 10
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Medical Expert
- ME 3.5 Use computer applications to optimize the images and/or views needed in order to answer the clinical question
- ME 3.5 Assess the quality and validity of the study and any impact on the diagnostic interpretation
- ME 3.5 Recognize artefacts and imaging pitfalls
- ME 3.5 Provide interpretation of nuclear cardiology studies
- ME 2.4 Provide suggestions for further testing and/or management as relevant
- ME 3.5 Recognize critical findings
Communicator
- COM 5.1 Provide clear, concise, accurate and grammatically correct reports of diagnostic testing in a timely fashion
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-12
Managing the routine caseload of a Nuclear Medicine department
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on case to case, individual patient management issues that arise in a NM department - This includes prioritization and scheduling of cases, responding to technologist questions about individual cases, oversight of examinations, responding to calls and requests from other physicians, and reporting a caseload of examinations - Identifying one’s limits and asking for assistance when needed is an important aspect of this EPA - This EPA does not include management of unusual workflow, such as shortages of radiopharmaceuticals or breakdown of equipment - The observation of this EPA is divided into two parts: NM expertise; and working with the team - The observation of NM expertise is based on a day of work; the observation of working with the team is based on a period of time of at least 3 months
Part A: NM expertise Direct and indirect observation by supervisor with input from other health care professionals Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Complexity of day: low; medium; high Collect 5 observations of achievement Part B: Working with the team Multiple observers provide feedback individually, which is then collated to one report Use Form 3. Form collects information on: - Observer role: NM physician; NM physicist; nurse; technologist; other physician/surgeon; other residents or students; other Collect at least 1 feedback form a year on interprofessional interactions during Core stage - At least 5 observers for each period of time - At least 2 NM physicians for each period of time - At least 1 technologist for each period of time - At least 1 respondent with another observer role for each period of time
Suggested observations: 5
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Complexity of day
- low
- medium
- high
Medical Expert
- Part A: ME 2.1 Prioritize requests for nuclear medicine examinations
- Part A: ME 3.5 Supervise, analyze and interpret nuclear medicine studies
- Part A: ME 5.1 Recognize and manage adverse events and emergency conditions requiring urgent medical attention
- Part A: ME 2.4 Advise referring physicians on the most appropriate investigation and/or sequence of investigations
Communicator
- Part A: COM 5.1 Convey urgent or unexpected results to the referring physician in a timely manner
- Part A: COM 4.3 Answer questions from a patient and family
Collaborator
- Part A: COL 1.4 Coordinate scheduling of cases with technical and other staff
- Part A: COL 1.4 Work with technical staff to solve imaging challenges and optimize the quality of examinations
- Part B: COL 1.2 Make effective use of the scope and expertise of other health care professionals
- Part B: COL 1.3 Communicate effectively with physicians and other health care professionals
- Part B: COL 1.4 Provide guidance to resolve clinical or imaging challenges
Leader
- Part A: L 2.1 Allocate resources for optimal delivery of services
Scholar
- Part B: S 2.2 Help to create a positive learning environment
- Part B: S 2.3 Provide learners with opportunities for appropriate clinical responsibility
Professional
- Part A: P 1.1 Work within personal limitations, seeking assistance as needed
- Part B: P 1.1 Respond to requests from technical staff in a timely manner
- Part B: P 1.1 Demonstrate professional behaviours, including punctuality, integrity and compassion
- Part B: P 1.1 Recognize when behaviours toward colleagues and/or learners undermine a respectful environment and report the behaviour to the appropriate individual
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-13
Managing the response to a radiation safety incident
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the NM resident’s role as an expert and leader in radiation safety - This EPA includes all aspects of identifying and responding to a radiation safety incident, including ensuring containment and/or risk mitigation and the immediate and longer term actions, including reporting to the appropriate institutional and regulatory bodies - This EPA may be observed in a real or simulated scenario
Direct observation by radiation safety officer, supervisor, or nuclear medicine physicist Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Event: clinical; simulated - Isotope (write in): - Skin contamination: yes; no - Type of spill: major; minor - Reporting required: yes; no Collect 2 observations of achievement - At least 1 with iodine 131 - At least 1 that required reporting
Suggested observations: 2
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Event
- clinical
- simulated
Medical Expert
- ME 5.1 Recognize and respond to a safety event in a timely manner
- ME 5.1 Contain the spill and mitigate risk to person, patient and/or staff
- ME 1.6 Seek assistance, as needed
- ME 5.1 Identify potential improvement opportunities arising from radiation safety incidents and near misses
Communicator
- COM 3.2 Communicate issues arising from a breach in radiation safety to the patient and/or family
Collaborator
- COL 1.4 Work with staff to ensure patient, technologist and personal safety
Leader
- L 3.1 Demonstrate responsibility for radiation safety
- L 3.1 Manage the specific nature of the radiation safety incident, following appropriate procedures
- L 3.1 Follow procedures for reporting radiation safety incidents
Professional
- P 3.1 Apply knowledge of the regulatory requirements related to radiation safety and safety incidents
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-14
Participating in interdisciplinary rounds
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the role of the NM specialist as a participant and contributor to interdisciplinary clinical decision making - This EPA includes preparing and presenting cases, including a review of relevant literature, responding to questions from the interdisciplinary group and communicating effectively in this setting - At this stage, the resident is not yet expected to be the sole source of NM expertise for the rounds. This is an expectation of the Transition to Practice stage
Direct observation by supervisor, with input from other participants Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Type of rounds (write in): Collect 2 observations of achievement - At least 2 different supervisors
Suggested observations: 2
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Medical Expert
- ME 2.2 Synthesize cases for discussion at interdisciplinary rounds
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of the natural history, clinical manifestations and management of conditions examined or treated by nuclear medicine techniques
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of diagnostic algorithms for investigation and the role of nuclear medicine imaging
Collaborator
- COL 1.3 Convey information to clinicians in a manner that enhances patient management
- COL 1.3 Encourage discussion, questions, and interaction relevant to the case
- COL 2.1 Actively listen to and engage in interactions with members of the interdisciplinary team
- COL 1.3 Support clinical colleagues in the development and implementation of a management plan
- COL 1.3 Participate effectively at interdisciplinary rounds
Health Advocate
- HA 1.1 Respond to individual patient diagnostic needs and issues as part of patient care
Scholar
- S 3.3 Critically evaluate health literature
- S 3.4 Integrate best evidence and clinical expertise
Professional
- P 1.1 Exhibit appropriate professional behaviours
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-15
Identifying and analyzing system-level safety, quality or resource stewardship concerns in healthcare delivery
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA includes an assessment of the quality of delivery of nuclear medicine care, identification of opportunities for improvement, and the proposal of a plan for ongoing quality improvement - The observation of this EPA is based on the review of a submission which must include a summary of data identifying a concern(s) in safety, quality or resource stewardship and an analysis of the human and system factors related to that concern. It may also include a proposal for improvement
Review of resident submission by supervisor, radiation safety office or quality officer Use Form 1 Collect 1 observation of achievement
Suggested observations: 1
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Leader
- L 1.1 Identify issues related to the quality of the delivery of nuclear medicine services
- L 1.1 Perform an analysis of human and system factors related to the quality concern
- L 1.1 Identify opportunities for improvement
- L 1.1 Formulate a plan for ongoing quality improvement
Scholar
- S 4.4 Collect data to characterize the issue
- S 4.4 Integrate existing literature and findings of data collection
- S 4.5 Summarize and communicate the findings
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-16
Delivering scholarly teaching to a variety of audiences, including peers, junior trainees, and/or other heal…
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the skills of critical appraisal, as well as presentation and teaching skills
Direct observation by a nuclear medicine physician Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Type of activity: journal club; grand rounds; case presentation; other - Audience (select all that apply): junior learners; peers; NM physicians; other audience Collect 3 observations of achievement - At least 1 journal club - At least 1 other formal teaching session - At least 2 observers
Suggested observations: 3
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Type of activity
- journal club
- grand rounds
- case presentation
- other
Audience
- junior learners
- peers
- NM physicians
- other audience
Scholar
- S 2.4 Identify the learning needs and desired learning outcomes of others
- S 2.4 Develop learning objectives for a teaching activity
- S 3.3 Critically evaluate health literature
- S 3.4 Integrate best evidence and clinical expertise
- S 2.4 Present the information in an organized manner to facilitate understanding
- S 2.4 Use audiovisual aids effectively
- S 2.4 Provide adequate time for questions and discussion
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
C-17
Providing clinical teaching and supervision
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the informal teaching that occurs in the clinical setting, and includes ensuring safe patient care, teaching and providing feedback - This includes supervising and teaching medical students, technologists and other residents - This EPA is divided into two parts: Supervisor observation; and Learner feedback
Part A: Supervisor observation Direct observation by supervisor Use Form 1 Collect 1 observation of achievement Part B: Learner feedback Competence Committee reviews collated learner feedback Use Form 3. Form collects information on: - Level of learner: medical student; junior resident; technologists Collect feedback from at least 2 learners
Suggested observations: 1
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Level of learner
- medical student
- junior resident
- technologists
Medical Expert
- Part A: ME 1.5 Carry out professional duties in the face of multiple competing demands
Collaborator
- Part B: COL 2.1 Delegate tasks and responsibilities in an appropriate and respectful manner
Scholar
- Part A: S 2.1 Apply strategies for deliberate, positive role-modelling
- Part A: S 2.2 Help to create a positive learning environment
- Part A: S 2.3 Supervise learners to ensure they work within their limits
- Part A: S 2.3 Balance clinical supervision and graduated responsibility, ensuring the safety of patients and learners
- Part A: S 2.4 Provide clinical teaching and/or other informal learning activities
- Part A: S 2.5 Provide feedback to enhance learning and performance
- Part B: S 2.2 Help to create a positive learning environment
- Part B: S 2.3 Provide learners with opportunities for appropriate clinical responsibility
- Part B: S 2.3 Available and accessible to junior learners
- Part B: S 2.4 Provide clinical teaching and/or other informal learning activities
- Part B: S 2.5 Provide feedback to enhance learning and performance
- Part B: S 2.1 Apply strategies for deliberate, positive role-modelling
Professional
- Part A: P 1.1 Recognize when behaviours towards colleagues and/or learners undermine a respectful environment and report the behaviour to the appropriate individual
- Part A: P 3.3 Participate in the assessment of junior learners
- Part A: P 4.3 Support others in their professional transitions
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
Transition to Practice
TTP-1
Managing the delivery of Nuclear Medicine services
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the NM specialist’s role in the overall delivery of safe patient care in a NM department, maintaining the volume and quality of the work - This includes all aspects of the work of a NM physician, clinical as well as academic (teaching, supervision, other) - This includes addressing department level and/or organizational problems in care delivery, such as equipment malfunction, radiopharmaceutical shortfall or complex case loads - The observation of this EPA is based on a day of work
Direct and indirect observation by supervisor with input from senior/chief technologist Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Complexity of day: low; medium; high - Issues arising (write in): Collect 5 observations of achievement - At least 2 medium or high complexity days
Suggested observations: 5
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Complexity of day
- low
- medium
- high
Medical Expert
- ME 1.5 Carry out professional duties in the face of multiple, competing demands
- ME 2.1 Prioritize requests for nuclear medicine examinations
- ME 3.5 Supervise, analyze and interpret nuclear medicine studies
- ME 3.5 Interpret and report the caseload of nuclear medicine studies in a timely fashion
- ME 2.4 Advise referring physicians on the most appropriate investigation and/or sequence of investigations
Collaborator
- COL 1.4 Coordinate scheduling of cases with technical and other staff
- COL 1.4 Guide technical staff to resolve clinical or imaging challenges
Leader
- L 2.1 Allocate resources for optimal delivery of services
- L 3.1 Adapt or develop imaging schedules to address a change in resources, including equipment malfunction and radiopharmaceutical shortfalls
- L 3.1 Work with staff to address personnel, management and patient care issues
Scholar
- S 3.4 Integrate best evidence and clinical expertise into decision-making
Professional
- P 1.1 Work within personal limitations, seeking assistance as needed
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
TTP-2
Developing plans for patients in whom there is uncertainty in diagnosis and/or treatment
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on the investigation and/or treatment of patients for whom there is uncertainty in diagnosis and/or uncertainty in determining optimal therapy - This EPA includes the interpretation of available imaging, synthesis with other clinical and laboratory information, integration of opinions from other NM specialists and other physicians, as well as effective communication of uncertainty to the patient/family and/or the referring physician
Case discussion and review of images by supervisor Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Type of case: diagnostic; therapeutic - Patient age: child; adult - Reason for uncertainty (write in): Collect 3 observations of achievement - At least 2 observers
Suggested observations: 3
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Type of case
- diagnostic
- therapeutic
Patient age
- child
- adult
Medical Expert
- ME 2.2 Synthesize cases for discussion at interdisciplinary rounds
- ME 1.3 Apply knowledge of the natural history, clinical manifestations and management of conditions examined or treated by nuclear medicine techniques
- ME 2.4 Demonstrate flexibility in clinical reasoning, in the setting of clinical uncertainty
- ME 2.4 Establish a patient-centred management plan despite limited, non- diagnostic, or conflicting clinical data
- ME 4.1 Determine the need and timing of referral to another physician, including radiologists and/or oncologists as relevant
Communicator
- COM 3.1 Convey information to the patient and/or family clearly and compassionately
- COM 4.3 Use communication strategies and skills that help the patient and family make decision despite uncertainty in diagnosis or treatment
Collaborator
- COL 2.1 Actively listen to and engage in interactions with members of the interdisciplinary team
- COL 1.3 Incorporate the opinions and perspectives of other physicians into the formulation of the management plan
- COL 2.2 Facilitate the development of consensus when there are differences in recommendations provided by other health care professionals
Scholar
- S 3.4 Integrate best evidence and clinical expertise into decision-making
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
TTP-3
Contributing NM expertise to interdisciplinary rounds
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA builds on the knowledge and skills demonstrated at the Core stage - This EPA focuses on the role of the NM specialist as the authority providing NM expertise to the team discussion, advocating for the patient and demonstrating professional behaviour - The observation of this EPA is not based on a single encounter, but over a period of time that includes at least 4 different instances of interaction - The observation of this EPA must include input from members of the interdisciplinary team. This may be documented by a supervisor who collects and then records the information in the observation form, or may be documented directly by members of the team completing an observation form
Direct observation by supervisor, with input from members of interdisciplinary team OR Direct observation from members of the interdisciplinary team Use Form 1. Form collects information on: - Type of rounds (write in): - Observers (select all that apply): nuclear medicine physician; medical oncologist; radiation oncologist; surgeon; other physician; other health care professional Collect feedback from at least 4 observers - At least 1 nuclear medicine physician - At least 1 other physician
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Medical Expert
- ME 1.4 Present and discuss cases effectively at clinical rounds, in the role of a consultant in nuclear medicine
- ME 3.3 Advocate for a patient’s procedure or therapy on the basis of urgency and available resources
Collaborator
- COL 1.3 Contribute to quality patient care by sharing expertise
- COL 1.3 Convey information to clinicians in a manner that enhances patient management
- COL 1.3 Communicate effectively with physicians and other health care professionals
- COL 1.3 Support clinical colleagues in the development and implementation of a management plan
- COL 2.2 Facilitate the development of consensus when there are differences in recommendations provided by other health care professionals
Leader
- L 2.1 Allocate health care resources for optimal patient care
Health Advocate
- HA 1.1 Respond to individual patient diagnostic needs and issues as part of patient care
Scholar
- S 3.3 Critically evaluate health literature
- S 3.4 Integrate best evidence and clinical expertise into decision-making
Professional
- P 1.1 Exhibit appropriate professional behaviours
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.
TTP-4
Contributing to administrative responsibilities
Key features and assessment plan
- This EPA focuses on activities beyond clinical work that contribute to the program, the institution or the discipline, engaging with others and sharing one’s own expertise - Examples of administrative activities include: program development, quality and safety review committee, residency selection committee, CARMS interviews, residency training committee, generation of the call schedule, acting as chief resident, and participation in a radiation safety committee, protocol review, and/or request for proposal (RFP) process - The observation of this EPA is based on submission to the Competence Committee of a summary or a portfolio of administrative activities during residency, and/or a document summarizing feedback from those affected by the resident’s contributions (e.g. residents on call schedule, committee chair)
Competence Committee assesses achievement based on review of resident submission Use Form 4
Entrustment (how much supervision did this activity need?)
- I had to do
- I had to talk them through
- I needed to prompt
- I needed to be there just in case
- I didn’t need to be there
Collaborator
- COL 1.1 Receive and respond appropriately to input from others
- COL 1.3 Work effectively with physicians and other colleagues
Leader
- L 3.1 Demonstrate an understanding of the administrative operations of a nuclear medicine department, clinic and/or service
- L 3.1 Contribute to improvements in nuclear medicine professional practice
Scholar
- S 3.4 Integrate best evidence and clinical expertise into decision-making
Professional
- P 2.1 Demonstrate a commitment to active participation in the activities of the profession
- P 1.1 Exhibit appropriate professional behaviours
Case description
Feedback provided
Next steps
Copyright © 2019 The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Referenced and produced with permission.