Mitchell, John D

Background: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) case log system establishes minimum clinical experiences for anesthesiology residency. While core program requirements were last updated in 2016, case log minimums themselves have not undergone a major revision in approximately two decades. Consequently, current requirements may not fully reflect changes in anesthetic practice and the evolving scope of perioperative medicine. In anticipation of major ACGME revisions in 2027, this study aimed to develop consensus-driven recommendations for modernizing residency case logs. Methods: A three-round modified Delphi study was conducted with a nationally representative panel of 60 stakeholders, including anesthesiology residency program directors and academic and private practice anesthesiologists. Panelists evaluated a comprehensive list of potential case categories across three domains: technical skills, surgical case characteristics, and patient demographics. In Round 1, panelists proposed minimum numbers or suggested that no requirement was necessary. Rounds 2 and 3 utilized iterative feedback to determine consensus on the necessity of requirements and specific minimum thresholds. Consensus was defined as at least two-thirds agreement. Results: Sixty invited experts completed all three rounds (100% response rate). The panel reached consensus to recommend new minimum requirements across several areas not currently tracked with minimums, including arterial lines (40), central lines (20), fiberoptic intubation (10), one-lung ventilation (10), neuromonitoring (10), POCUS (10 Cardiac, 10 Lung), and NORA (20 cases). Regarding existing requirements, consensus was reached to recommend increasing total peripheral nerve blocks from 40 to 60, with added requirements for anatomic specificity, and cardiac case minimums from 20 to 25. The panel also established consensus definitions for life-threatening pathologies to standardize reporting. The panel did not achieve consensus on several areas, including, for example, whether a minimum requirement for patients younger than 3 months should be maintained. Conclusion: These findings provide stakeholder-validated recommendations to inform upcoming ACGME requirement revisions.

The evolution of medical education, from a time-based to a competency-based platform, began nearly 30 years ago and continues to slowly take shape. The development of valid and reproducible assessment tools is the first step. Medical educators across specialties acknowledge the challenges and remain motivated to develop a relevant, generalizable, and measurable system. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) remains committed to its responsibility to the public by assuring that the process and outcome of graduate medical education in the nation’s residency programs produce competent, safe, and compassionate doctors. The Milestones Project is the ACGME’s current strategy in the evolution to a competency-based system, which allows each specialty to develop its own set of subcompetencies and 5-level progression, or milestones, along a continuum of novice to expert. The education community has now had nearly 5 years of experience with these rubrics. While not perfect, Milestones 1.0 provided important foundational information and insights. The first iteration of the Anesthesiology Milestones highlighted some mismatch between subcompetencies and current and future clinical practices. They have also highlighted challenges with assessment and evaluation of learners, and the need for faculty development tools. Committed to an iterative process, the ACGME assembled representatives from stakeholder groups within the Anesthesiology community to develop the second generation of Milestones. This special article describes the foundational data from Milestones 1.0 that was useful in the development process of Milestones 2.0, the rationale behind the important changes, and the additional tools made available with this iteration.