CAEP 2015 Academic Symposium: Recommendations for University Governance and Administration for Emergency Medicine.

Q1 Earth and Planetary Sciences
David Petrie, Anil Chopra, Alecs Chochinov, Jennifer D Artz, Michael Schull, John Tallon, Gordon Jones, Shannon MacPhee, Margaret Ackerman, Ian G Stiell, Jim Christenson
{"title":"CAEP 2015 Academic Symposium: Recommendations for University Governance and Administration for Emergency Medicine.","authors":"David Petrie, Anil Chopra, Alecs Chochinov, Jennifer D Artz, Michael Schull, John Tallon, Gordon Jones, Shannon MacPhee, Margaret Ackerman, Ian G Stiell, Jim Christenson","doi":"10.1017/cem.2016.22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>1) To identify the strengths and challenges of governance structures in academic emergency medicine (EM), and 2) to make recommendations on principles and approaches that may guide improvements.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Over the course of 9 months, eight established EM leaders met by teleconference, reviewed the literature, and discussed their findings and experiences to arrive at recommendations on governance in academic units of EM. The results and recommendations were presented at the annual Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) Academic Symposium, where attendees provided feedback. The updated recommendations were subsequently distributed to the CAEP Academic Section for further input, and the final recommendations were decided by consensus.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The panel identified four governance areas of interest: 1) the elements of governance; 2) the relationships between emergency physicians and academic units of EM, and between the academic units of EM and faculty of medicine; 3) current status of governance in Canadian academic units of EM; and 4) essential elements of good governance. Six recommendations were developed around three themes, including 1) the importance of good governance; 2) the purposes of an academic unit of EM; and 3) essential elements for better governance for academic units of EM. Recommendations included identifying the importance of good governance, recognizing the need to adapt to the different models depending on the local environment; seeking full departmental status, provided it is mutually beneficial to EM and the faculty of medicine (and health authority); using a consultation service to learn from the experience of other academic units of EM; and establishing an annual forum for EM leaders.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although governance of academic EM is complex, there are ways to iteratively improve the mission of academic units of EM: providing exceptional patient care through research and education. Although there is no one-size-fits-all guide, there are practical recommended steps for academic units of EM to consider.</p>","PeriodicalId":56140,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Geophysics","volume":"38 1","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Geophysics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cem.2016.22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Earth and Planetary Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: 1) To identify the strengths and challenges of governance structures in academic emergency medicine (EM), and 2) to make recommendations on principles and approaches that may guide improvements.

Methods: Over the course of 9 months, eight established EM leaders met by teleconference, reviewed the literature, and discussed their findings and experiences to arrive at recommendations on governance in academic units of EM. The results and recommendations were presented at the annual Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) Academic Symposium, where attendees provided feedback. The updated recommendations were subsequently distributed to the CAEP Academic Section for further input, and the final recommendations were decided by consensus.

Results: The panel identified four governance areas of interest: 1) the elements of governance; 2) the relationships between emergency physicians and academic units of EM, and between the academic units of EM and faculty of medicine; 3) current status of governance in Canadian academic units of EM; and 4) essential elements of good governance. Six recommendations were developed around three themes, including 1) the importance of good governance; 2) the purposes of an academic unit of EM; and 3) essential elements for better governance for academic units of EM. Recommendations included identifying the importance of good governance, recognizing the need to adapt to the different models depending on the local environment; seeking full departmental status, provided it is mutually beneficial to EM and the faculty of medicine (and health authority); using a consultation service to learn from the experience of other academic units of EM; and establishing an annual forum for EM leaders.

Conclusion: Although governance of academic EM is complex, there are ways to iteratively improve the mission of academic units of EM: providing exceptional patient care through research and education. Although there is no one-size-fits-all guide, there are practical recommended steps for academic units of EM to consider.

CAEP 2015 学术研讨会:对大学急诊医学治理和管理的建议。
目标:1)确定急诊医学(EM)学术机构管理结构的优势和挑战;2)就可指导改进的原则和方法提出建议:在 9 个月的时间里,8 位资深的急诊医学领导者通过电话会议进行了会面,回顾了相关文献,并讨论了他们的发现和经验,从而就急诊医学学术单位的管理提出了建议。研究结果和建议在加拿大急诊医师协会(CAEP)年度学术研讨会上公布,与会者提供了反馈意见。随后,更新后的建议分发给了加拿大急诊医师协会学术分会,以进一步征求意见,并在协商一致的基础上确定了最终建议:小组确定了四个值得关注的管理领域:1) 治理的要素;2) 急诊科医生与急诊科学术单位之间的关系,以及急诊科学术单位与医学院之间的关系;3) 加拿大急诊科学术单位的治理现状;以及 4) 良好治理的基本要素。围绕三个主题提出了六项建议,包括:1)良好治理的重要性;2)急诊医学学术单位的目的;3)改善急诊医学学术单位治理的基本要素。建议包括:明确良好治理的重要性,认识到根据当地环境适应不同模式的必要性;寻求正式的系级地位,前提是这对急诊科和医学院(及卫生当局)互利互惠;利用咨询服务学习其他急诊科学术单位的经验;以及为急诊科领导人建立年度论坛:尽管急诊医学学术单位的管理非常复杂,但仍有办法不断改进急诊医学学术单位的使命:通过研究和教育为患者提供卓越的医疗服务。虽然没有放之四海而皆准的指南,但还是有一些切实可行的建议步骤可供急诊医学学术单位参考。
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
Advances in Geophysics
Advances in Geophysics GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
16.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
>12 weeks
×
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