Emergency medicine resident involvement in emergency medical services

IF 0.3 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Natalie Akers, Bryan Wilson, A. Ray
{"title":"Emergency medicine resident involvement in emergency medical services","authors":"Natalie Akers, Bryan Wilson, A. Ray","doi":"10.4103/ijam.ijam_116_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Emergency medical services (EMS) are a critical component to Emergency Medicine (EM) residency training. In the United States, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) has established minimum training requirements for EM residency programs. Since the last study exploring resident EMS involvement was performed, there have been over 100 new EM resident programs started. Given the rapid increase in new EM programs, we sought to determine EMS experiences provided to current EM residents. Materials and Methods: A 22-question anonymous online survey was distributed through E-mail to program directors of approved EM residencies in October 2020. A follow-up reminder was sent 3 weeks later. Results: In total, 51 of 257 programs responded (20% response rate). Forty-five percent of EM residents experience between 10 and 25 EMS calls during their residency, 31% experience 26–50, and 20% experience >50 calls. The majority of programs (53%) have a separate EMS rotation where residents function as observers, 24% of residents function as providers, and 25% also have residents respond in a dedicated physician response vehicle. Aeromedical exposure is limited (47% have none and 43% average only 1–9 flights). Two-thirds of programs (67%) have residents provide online medical command during their ED shifts and 61% require residents to provide didactics to EMS clinicians. Despite ACGME requirements, only two-thirds of programs (69%) provide training about disaster/mass casualty incident (MCI) management and 67% have them participate in a disaster/MCI drill. About one-third of programs (31%) have decreased EMS experiences due to limited time in the residency curriculum, and 20% of programs have limited EMS experiences due to the COVID pandemic. Conclusions: The majority of responding EM residency programs meet ACGME EMS-related requirements. There is an opportunity for improvement around disaster education based on these data. Limited time in the curriculum and the COVID pandemic were cited as reasons that programs have limited their EMS experiences. The following core competencies are addressed in this article: Practice-Based Learning and Improvement, Medical Knowledge.","PeriodicalId":36495,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Academic Medicine","volume":"8 1","pages":"213 - 216"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Academic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijam.ijam_116_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Emergency medical services (EMS) are a critical component to Emergency Medicine (EM) residency training. In the United States, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) has established minimum training requirements for EM residency programs. Since the last study exploring resident EMS involvement was performed, there have been over 100 new EM resident programs started. Given the rapid increase in new EM programs, we sought to determine EMS experiences provided to current EM residents. Materials and Methods: A 22-question anonymous online survey was distributed through E-mail to program directors of approved EM residencies in October 2020. A follow-up reminder was sent 3 weeks later. Results: In total, 51 of 257 programs responded (20% response rate). Forty-five percent of EM residents experience between 10 and 25 EMS calls during their residency, 31% experience 26–50, and 20% experience >50 calls. The majority of programs (53%) have a separate EMS rotation where residents function as observers, 24% of residents function as providers, and 25% also have residents respond in a dedicated physician response vehicle. Aeromedical exposure is limited (47% have none and 43% average only 1–9 flights). Two-thirds of programs (67%) have residents provide online medical command during their ED shifts and 61% require residents to provide didactics to EMS clinicians. Despite ACGME requirements, only two-thirds of programs (69%) provide training about disaster/mass casualty incident (MCI) management and 67% have them participate in a disaster/MCI drill. About one-third of programs (31%) have decreased EMS experiences due to limited time in the residency curriculum, and 20% of programs have limited EMS experiences due to the COVID pandemic. Conclusions: The majority of responding EM residency programs meet ACGME EMS-related requirements. There is an opportunity for improvement around disaster education based on these data. Limited time in the curriculum and the COVID pandemic were cited as reasons that programs have limited their EMS experiences. The following core competencies are addressed in this article: Practice-Based Learning and Improvement, Medical Knowledge.
急诊医学住院医师参与急诊医疗服务
简介:急诊医疗服务(EMS)是急诊医学(EM)住院医师培训的重要组成部分。在美国,研究生医学教育认证委员会(ACGME)已经建立了EM住院医师计划的最低培训要求。自从上一项关于住院医生参与急救的研究开始以来,已经有超过100个新的住院医生项目启动。鉴于新兴医疗项目的快速增长,我们试图确定为当前的新兴医疗居民提供的医疗服务经验。材料与方法:一份包含22个问题的匿名在线调查于2020年10月通过电子邮件发送给已批准的新兴市场住院医师项目主管。3周后发送了后续提醒。结果:257个项目中有51个项目有响应(20%的回复率)。45%的急诊医生在住院期间会接到10到25个急诊电话,31%的人会接到26到50个急诊电话,20%的人会接到100到50个急诊电话。大多数项目(53%)有单独的EMS轮转,其中住院医生作为观察员,24%的住院医生作为提供者,25%的住院医生也在专门的医生响应车辆中响应。航空医疗接触是有限的(47%没有,43%平均只有1-9次飞行)。三分之二(67%)的项目要求住院医师在急诊科轮班期间提供在线医疗指令,61%的项目要求住院医师向EMS临床医生提供指导。尽管有ACGME的要求,但只有三分之二(69%)的项目提供灾难/大规模伤亡事件(MCI)管理培训,67%的项目让他们参加灾难/MCI演习。大约三分之一(31%)的项目由于住院医师课程时间有限而减少了EMS经验,20%的项目由于COVID大流行而减少了EMS经验。结论:大多数响应的急诊住院医师项目符合ACGME的急诊相关要求。基于这些数据,我们有机会改进灾害教育。课程时间有限和新冠疫情被认为是项目限制EMS经验的原因。本文讨论了以下核心能力:基于实践的学习和改进,医学知识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Academic Medicine
International Journal of Academic Medicine Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信