Computerized tracking of emergency medicine resident clinical experience

Although we commonly assume that because residents spend a given number of months in the emergency department they achieve adequate exposure to all necessary clinical entities, this has never been shown. We suspect, rather, that great variability exists among residents in the number and variety of patients they see; and that with respect to the ED, there are important diagnoses that are rare or absent in the clinical pathology of a training program. To confirm these hypotheses, we implemented a computerized system of recording patients and diagnoses managed in the ED by the 33 residents of the University of Illinois Affiliated Hospitals Emergency Medicine Residency. We collected data for nine months and accumulated 2,152 shifts of clinical experience. These data confirm our hypotheses. We found that senior residents managed an average of 11.9 +/- 2.3 patients per ten-hour shift, but the quickest resident saw almost twice as many patients as the slowest. Junior residents saw fewer patients, 8.5 +/- 1.4 patients per shift, but maintained a twofold difference between the fastest and slowest. Furthermore, there are important diagnoses that present too rarely for each resident to become facile in their management. We found that 22.7% of the 554 diagnoses listed in the Emergency Medicine Core Content never once presented to the ED. An additional 34.7% of these diagnoses did present, but so rarely that each resident could not possibly manage one case during a residency. The Length of Training Report of the American College of Emergency Physicians provides objective guidelines for the number of encounters a resident should have with 283 clinical entities. In this study, residents fell short of these guidelines with 50.5% of diagnoses. While absolute quantity of exposure does not assure competence in management, we recommend that each residency monitor the experience of its residents. This allows a residency to change its curriculum to make optimum use of available pathology, as well as to supplement deficiencies in clinical experience with case simulations.     

Building a resident research program in emergency medicine

Residency training programs requirements state, “Residents should participate in scholarly activity.” However, there is little consensus regarding how best to achieve these requirements. The objective of this study is to implement a resident research program that emphasizes resident participation in quantitative or qualitative empirical work. A three-step program “Think, Do, Write” roughly follows the 3 years of the residency. During the first phase, the resident chooses a topic, formulates a hypothesis, and completes standard research certifications. Phase 2 involves obtaining Institutional Review Board approval, and conducting the study. The final phase entails analyzing and interpreting the data, and writing an abstract to present during an annual research day. Residents are encouraged to submit their projects for presentation at scientific conferences and for publication. Multiple departmental resources are available, including a Resident Research Fund, and full support of the faculty. Prior to the new program, most scholarly activity consisted of case reports, book chapters, review articles, or other miscellaneous projects; only 27 % represented empirical studies. Starting in 2012, the new program was fully implemented, resulting in notable growth in original empirical works among residents. Currently there is almost 100 % participation in studies, and numerous residents have presented at national conferences, and have peer-reviewed publications. With a comprehensive and supported program in place, emergency medicine residents proved capable of conducting high-quality empirical research within their relatively limited time. Overall, residents developed valuable skills in research design and statistical analysis, and greatly increased their productivity as academic and clinical researchers.     

Factors influencing resident career choices in emergency medicine.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the attitudes of residents in emergency medicine regarding a career in academics. DESIGN: A 22-item questionnaire was administered to residents in conjunction with the yearly American Board of Emergency Medicine inservice examination. Demographic information and factors influencing career intent were elicited. Respondents were classified by intent on a career in emergency medicine. A three-way analysis of variance was used to address group differences for eight specific factors impacting on career decision. Chi-square analysis was used to address questions involving relationships among variables with dichotomous or categorical responses. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 1,654 residents, and 1,238 (75%) completed the questionnaire. Motivating factors demonstrating significant differences between those residents planning an academic career and those not interested in academe were a desire to do research, desire to teach, desire to make a contribution to medicine, and exposure to role models, with less emphasis on the need for free time for other interests and less concern regarding practice location. More than 80% of those not going into academic emergency medicine believed they were adequately exposed to research in residency compared with 65% of those intent on a career in academe (P less than .01). Research in medical school, residency, and authorship of a research paper were significantly more prevalent for those residents desiring a career in academe (P less than .01). Twenty-six percent of residents responded that their role models for research were less than adequate. Seventeen percent of residents intend to take fellowship training. The most popular fields for fellowships were toxicology (25%), emergency medical services (21%), pediatrics (15%), and research (9%). CONCLUSION: The results of this survey address attitudes among residents toward a career in academic emergency medicine. Factors such as motivation, role models, and exposure to research may help academicians plan strategies to meet the future needs of academic emergency medicine.     

Design of a resident in-field experience for an emergency medicine residency curriculum

The importance of a resident training in emergency medical services (EMS) is emphasized by the recent development of formal curricula that attempt to prepare the graduating emergency physician for a leadership role in the EMS community. Despite the delineation of specific goals and objectives of such training, actual field exposure and experience in prehospital care have remained voluntary and often sporadic. We designed a resident experience for on-scene attendance at selected incidents and surveyed our residents for their opinion of the curriculum. We also examined field records to determine the nature of field calls and the numbers and types of procedures carried out by second- and third-year residents. During the six-month review period, 158 cardiac arrests were attended, 58 difficult intubations were carried out, 49 central or peripheral lines were started, and 24 severely injured patients were treated on-scene or en route to the hospital. The average response time by the resident to the scene was nine minutes, and the average on-scene time was 20 minutes. Residents completing the survey indicated support for the program and agreed that it has enriched their learning experience. Combined with an air (helicopter and fixed-wing) and ground critical care transport service, the EMS in-field experience has provided opportunities for residents to make rapid decisions, to appreciate the field team's perspective, to report concisely and clearly to colleagues, and to practice required advanced skills. We believe that a formal, planned, and balanced in-field curriculum can afford an opportunity for unique educational experiences that will enrich the graduate program in emergency medicine.     

Burnout and internal medicine resident work-hour restrictions

BACKGROUND: Burnout is very common in internal medicine residents. Effective July 2003, all residents were restricted to work less than an average of 80 hours per week and no more than 30 hours of continuous duty for patient care and educational obligations. We evaluated rates of burnout in internal medicine residents before and after the implementation of the new work-hour restriction. METHODS: University of Colorado Health Science Center internal medicine residents were surveyed in May 2003 and May 2004. The survey contained the Maslach Burnout Inventory, organized into 3 subscales (ie, emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment); the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders depression screen; and self-reported quality of care and education. RESULTS: The response rate was 87% (121 of 139 residents) and 74% (106 of 143 residents) in 2003 and 2004, respectively. Self-reported hours worked decreased from a mean of 74.6 to 67.1 (P = .003). In 2004, 13% fewer residents experienced high emotional exhaustion (42% vs 29%; P = .03). There was a trend toward fewer residents with high depersonalization (61% vs 55%; P = .13) and fewer residents with a positive depression screen (51% vs 41%; P = .11). Personal accomplishment did not change. The assessment of self-reported quality of care did not significantly change from 2003 to 2004. Residents reported attending fewer educational conferences per month (18.99 vs 15.56; P = .01). Overall residency satisfaction decreased 6 mm on a 100-mm visual analogue score (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Burnout continues to be a major problem. Reducing hours may be the first step to reduce burnout but may also affect education and quality of care.