理解ACGME模拟标准:机构和项目需求的文件分析。

Journal of graduate medical education Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-13 DOI:10.4300/JGME-D-24-00127.1
Alexis E Scott, Krystle K Campbell, Jeanne Carey, Larissa Velez, Aditee Ambardekar, Daniel J Scott
{"title":"理解ACGME模拟标准:机构和项目需求的文件分析。","authors":"Alexis E Scott, Krystle K Campbell, Jeanne Carey, Larissa Velez, Aditee Ambardekar, Daniel J Scott","doi":"10.4300/JGME-D-24-00127.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b> Our institution has established priorities for graduate medical education (GME) simulation which include increasing adoption of, garnering additional financial support for, and creating a core simulation curriculum. Better understanding of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) simulation requirements will inform our efforts and serve as a guide for other institutions. <b>Objective</b> The purpose of this study was to perform a structured review of ACGME simulation standards using a document analysis to guide GME simulation activities at an institutional level. <b>Methods</b> A document analysis was performed from May 2023 to June 2024 to select and search ACGME Institutional and Program Requirements corresponding to the primary specialties for 21 clinical departments that financially support our simulation center. Content relevant to simulation was identified, and iterative coding with investigator team consensus was performed to assign categories, characterize the requirements, and interpret the findings. <b>Results</b> Twenty-four documents included 120 simulation requirements that were assigned to 12 categories; 70 (58%) requirements were mandatory whereas 50 (42%) were not, and 48 (40%) were simulation-specific, whereas 72 (60%) were simulation-optional. All reviewed specialties had simulation requirements (average 5.4, range 2-12), but the ACGME Institutional Requirements did not. Moderate to strong evidence supported (1) simulation usage by all 21 departments; (2) the need for institutional resource support; and (3) institutional-level patient safety simulation curricula. <b>Conclusions</b> This study identified a large number of simulation requirements, including mandatory patient safety curricula requirements, for all specialties analyzed.</p>","PeriodicalId":37886,"journal":{"name":"Journal of graduate medical education","volume":"16 6","pages":"691-700"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11641868/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding ACGME Standards for Simulation: A Document Analysis of Institutional and Program Requirements.\",\"authors\":\"Alexis E Scott, Krystle K Campbell, Jeanne Carey, Larissa Velez, Aditee Ambardekar, Daniel J Scott\",\"doi\":\"10.4300/JGME-D-24-00127.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background</b> Our institution has established priorities for graduate medical education (GME) simulation which include increasing adoption of, garnering additional financial support for, and creating a core simulation curriculum. Better understanding of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) simulation requirements will inform our efforts and serve as a guide for other institutions. <b>Objective</b> The purpose of this study was to perform a structured review of ACGME simulation standards using a document analysis to guide GME simulation activities at an institutional level. <b>Methods</b> A document analysis was performed from May 2023 to June 2024 to select and search ACGME Institutional and Program Requirements corresponding to the primary specialties for 21 clinical departments that financially support our simulation center. Content relevant to simulation was identified, and iterative coding with investigator team consensus was performed to assign categories, characterize the requirements, and interpret the findings. <b>Results</b> Twenty-four documents included 120 simulation requirements that were assigned to 12 categories; 70 (58%) requirements were mandatory whereas 50 (42%) were not, and 48 (40%) were simulation-specific, whereas 72 (60%) were simulation-optional. All reviewed specialties had simulation requirements (average 5.4, range 2-12), but the ACGME Institutional Requirements did not. Moderate to strong evidence supported (1) simulation usage by all 21 departments; (2) the need for institutional resource support; and (3) institutional-level patient safety simulation curricula. <b>Conclusions</b> This study identified a large number of simulation requirements, including mandatory patient safety curricula requirements, for all specialties analyzed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37886,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of graduate medical education\",\"volume\":\"16 6\",\"pages\":\"691-700\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11641868/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of graduate medical education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-24-00127.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of graduate medical education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-24-00127.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们的机构已经为研究生医学教育(GME)模拟建立了优先事项,包括增加采用,获得额外的财政支持,并创建核心模拟课程。更好地了解研究生医学教育认证委员会(ACGME)的模拟要求将为我们的工作提供信息,并为其他机构提供指导。本研究的目的是使用文件分析对ACGME模拟标准进行结构化审查,以指导机构层面的GME模拟活动。方法从2023年5月至2024年6月进行文献分析,选择并检索资助本模拟中心的21个临床科室的主要专业对应的ACGME机构和项目要求。确定了与模拟相关的内容,并在研究者团队的共识下进行了迭代编码,以分配类别、描述需求并解释结果。结果24份文件包含120个模拟要求,分为12个类别;70个(58%)需求是强制性的,而50个(42%)不是,48个(40%)是特定于模拟的,而72个(60%)是可选的。所有审查的专业都有模拟要求(平均5.4,范围2-12),但ACGME机构要求没有。(1)所有21个部门都使用模拟;(2)机构资源支持的需求;(3)机构级患者安全模拟课程。本研究确定了大量的模拟要求,包括强制性的患者安全课程要求,分析了所有专业。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Understanding ACGME Standards for Simulation: A Document Analysis of Institutional and Program Requirements.

Background Our institution has established priorities for graduate medical education (GME) simulation which include increasing adoption of, garnering additional financial support for, and creating a core simulation curriculum. Better understanding of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) simulation requirements will inform our efforts and serve as a guide for other institutions. Objective The purpose of this study was to perform a structured review of ACGME simulation standards using a document analysis to guide GME simulation activities at an institutional level. Methods A document analysis was performed from May 2023 to June 2024 to select and search ACGME Institutional and Program Requirements corresponding to the primary specialties for 21 clinical departments that financially support our simulation center. Content relevant to simulation was identified, and iterative coding with investigator team consensus was performed to assign categories, characterize the requirements, and interpret the findings. Results Twenty-four documents included 120 simulation requirements that were assigned to 12 categories; 70 (58%) requirements were mandatory whereas 50 (42%) were not, and 48 (40%) were simulation-specific, whereas 72 (60%) were simulation-optional. All reviewed specialties had simulation requirements (average 5.4, range 2-12), but the ACGME Institutional Requirements did not. Moderate to strong evidence supported (1) simulation usage by all 21 departments; (2) the need for institutional resource support; and (3) institutional-level patient safety simulation curricula. Conclusions This study identified a large number of simulation requirements, including mandatory patient safety curricula requirements, for all specialties analyzed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of graduate medical education
Journal of graduate medical education Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
248
期刊介绍: - Be the leading peer-reviewed journal in graduate medical education; - Promote scholarship and enhance the quality of research in the field; - Disseminate evidence-based approaches for teaching, assessment, and improving the learning environment; and - Generate new knowledge that enhances graduates'' ability to provide high-quality, cost-effective care.
×
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