Sara M. Krzyzaniak MD, Julie Tondt MD, Natalie Strokes DO, Nicholas Hartman MD, MPH, Josh Davis MD, Benjamin H. Schnapp MD, MEd
Introduction
Effective supervision of learners in the clinical environment is essential for learner professional development and patient safety. Despite this importance, many supervising attendings receive little to no training around supervising learners. As faculty join emergency departments (EDs) at primary and affiliate training sites, it is essential to provide them with a framework to utilize when approaching learner supervision.
Methods
A workgroup of members from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Education Committee was formed to respond to a directive from the SAEM board to identify best practices for new clinician educators when supervising learners. Drawing on their experience and expertise in learner supervision, medical education, and faculty development, the members completed a literature search to identify best practices in supervision, with a special focus on the ED environment.
Analysis
The workgroup identified three domains that must be considered to provide effective supervision to learners: learner characteristics, supervisor characteristics, and clinical environment.
Recommendations
Implementing effective supervision in the clinical environment requires a multifaceted approach and consideration of factors for both the learner and the supervisor. Direct observation, supplemented by standardized assessment tools, is the preferred supervision method; however, the demands of our clinical environment may require supervisors to assess the learner's proficiency using other methods including informal knowledge assessments, inference from oral presentations, review of clinical documentation, feedback from patients themselves, procedural walkthroughs, and secondhand information from the health care or training team.
{"title":"A practical primer on clinical supervision of learners in the emergency department","authors":"Sara M. Krzyzaniak MD, Julie Tondt MD, Natalie Strokes DO, Nicholas Hartman MD, MPH, Josh Davis MD, Benjamin H. Schnapp MD, MEd","doi":"10.1002/aet2.70015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.70015","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Effective supervision of learners in the clinical environment is essential for learner professional development and patient safety. Despite this importance, many supervising attendings receive little to no training around supervising learners. As faculty join emergency departments (EDs) at primary and affiliate training sites, it is essential to provide them with a framework to utilize when approaching learner supervision.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A workgroup of members from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Education Committee was formed to respond to a directive from the SAEM board to identify best practices for new clinician educators when supervising learners. Drawing on their experience and expertise in learner supervision, medical education, and faculty development, the members completed a literature search to identify best practices in supervision, with a special focus on the ED environment.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Analysis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The workgroup identified three domains that must be considered to provide effective supervision to learners: learner characteristics, supervisor characteristics, and clinical environment.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Recommendations</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Implementing effective supervision in the clinical environment requires a multifaceted approach and consideration of factors for both the learner and the supervisor. Direct observation, supplemented by standardized assessment tools, is the preferred supervision method; however, the demands of our clinical environment may require supervisors to assess the learner's proficiency using other methods including informal knowledge assessments, inference from oral presentations, review of clinical documentation, feedback from patients themselves, procedural walkthroughs, and secondhand information from the health care or training team.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":37032,"journal":{"name":"AEM Education and Training","volume":"9 S1","pages":"S7-S11"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143884077","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Burnout and faculty disengagement are critical challenges in academic emergency medicine (EM), with burnout rates as high as 70% among emergency physicians. These issues, worsened by the COVID-19 pandemic and workforce shifts, lead to decreased professional satisfaction and increased attrition. Addressing these concerns is vital to fostering a supportive, equitable, and growth-oriented environment for faculty.
Objective
The faculty development committee (FDC) was established to empower faculty to address professional development, inclusivity, transparency, and wellness through innovative and collaborative initiatives.
Methods
Faculty needs were identified based on data from a biannual department culture survey. Findings revealed key areas for improvement, including career advancement, wellness, and equity, among others. A faculty-driven approach was used to design and implement initiatives, including a mentorship program, educational curriculum, equity assessments, and flexible scheduling policies. The biannual survey and informal feedback solicitation were used to evaluate outcomes and refine interventions.
Results
The mandatory mentorship program accelerated promotions, including the historic advancement of female faculty to full professor roles. The faculty education curriculum enhanced breadth of knowledge and clinical skills, leading to increased satisfaction with educational opportunities (45% in 2022 vs. 35% in 2020). Transparent policies on leadership roles and salary equity improved inclusivity and fairness. Flexible scheduling accommodations, including age and pregnancy/lactation status–based shift exemptions, expanded vacation and holiday options, and extended parental leave, improve work–life balance and faculty engagement. Surveys demonstrated improvements in departmental culture and satisfaction.
Conclusion
The FDC effectively addressed wellness, equity, and professional growth in an academic EM group by implementing faculty-centered and faculty-driven solutions. The committee's work has fostered a supportive, inclusive, and development-focused environment, serving as a model for addressing similar challenges in academic institutions.
{"title":"Faculty development committee: Evolution through engagement and empowerment","authors":"Alexa Sabedra MD, Caroline Freiermuth MD, MS, FACEP, Sally Santen MD, PhD, Elizabeth Leenellett MD, FACEP","doi":"10.1002/aet2.70017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.70017","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Burnout and faculty disengagement are critical challenges in academic emergency medicine (EM), with burnout rates as high as 70% among emergency physicians. These issues, worsened by the COVID-19 pandemic and workforce shifts, lead to decreased professional satisfaction and increased attrition. Addressing these concerns is vital to fostering a supportive, equitable, and growth-oriented environment for faculty.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objective</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The faculty development committee (FDC) was established to empower faculty to address professional development, inclusivity, transparency, and wellness through innovative and collaborative initiatives.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Faculty needs were identified based on data from a biannual department culture survey. Findings revealed key areas for improvement, including career advancement, wellness, and equity, among others. A faculty-driven approach was used to design and implement initiatives, including a mentorship program, educational curriculum, equity assessments, and flexible scheduling policies. The biannual survey and informal feedback solicitation were used to evaluate outcomes and refine interventions.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The mandatory mentorship program accelerated promotions, including the historic advancement of female faculty to full professor roles. The faculty education curriculum enhanced breadth of knowledge and clinical skills, leading to increased satisfaction with educational opportunities (45% in 2022 vs. 35% in 2020). Transparent policies on leadership roles and salary equity improved inclusivity and fairness. Flexible scheduling accommodations, including age and pregnancy/lactation status–based shift exemptions, expanded vacation and holiday options, and extended parental leave, improve work–life balance and faculty engagement. Surveys demonstrated improvements in departmental culture and satisfaction.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The FDC effectively addressed wellness, equity, and professional growth in an academic EM group by implementing faculty-centered and faculty-driven solutions. The committee's work has fostered a supportive, inclusive, and development-focused environment, serving as a model for addressing similar challenges in academic institutions.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":37032,"journal":{"name":"AEM Education and Training","volume":"9 S1","pages":"S66-S72"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/aet2.70017","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143884245","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Natalie Strokes DO, MPH, MS, Richard Sapp MD, MS, Meta Carroll MD, Elizabeth Maxwell Hovis MD, Mary McLean MD, Shannon Markus MD, MPH, Aaryn Hammond MD, Rosemarie Diaz MD, MPH, Ryan E. Tsuchida MD, Marcia Perry MD, Edgardo Ordonez MD, MPH
Background
In emergency medicine (EM), language choice significantly impacts patient care and can potentially cause harm, dehumanize patients, and introduce bias. Stigmatizing language in medical settings can affect patient dignity, trust, and outcomes. Despite its importance, there is limited education on avoiding stigmatizing language in EM. This concept paper addresses the need to raise awareness and develop strategies for use of inclusive language in the emergency department (ED).
Methods
A didactic session titled “Words Matter: Destigmatizing the Language of Medicine” was developed and presented at the 2024 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Annual Meeting. The session involved a collaborative team of 12 individuals, including an EM resident, health equity fellow, and EM faculty. Content creation involved a comprehensive literature review and consensus-based decision making. The session featured current research related to stigmatizing language and interactive components, including case-based discussions and equity-focused alternative language choices.
Results
The didactic session, attended by approximately 70 participants, successfully highlighted the impact of stigmatizing language on health care disparities and patient trust. Interactive case studies allowed participants to identify and propose alternatives to stigmatizing language. The session provided actionable strategies for integrating inclusive language into practice and education. Postdidactic discussions emphasized the need for ongoing research and specific educational interventions to address stigmatizing language in EM.
Conclusions
Addressing stigmatizing language in EM is crucial for providing equitable and respectful patient care. The didactic session demonstrated effective methods for raising awareness and training health care professionals in using inclusive language. Future efforts should focus on developing standardized approaches for identifying and mitigating stigmatizing language, integrating these practices into training programs, and conducting longitudinal research to assess the impact on patient outcomes. Creating a culture of inclusive language in the ED will contribute to improved patient trust and care quality.
{"title":"Words matter: Destigmatizing the language of medicine through research, training, and future directions for emergency medicine","authors":"Natalie Strokes DO, MPH, MS, Richard Sapp MD, MS, Meta Carroll MD, Elizabeth Maxwell Hovis MD, Mary McLean MD, Shannon Markus MD, MPH, Aaryn Hammond MD, Rosemarie Diaz MD, MPH, Ryan E. Tsuchida MD, Marcia Perry MD, Edgardo Ordonez MD, MPH","doi":"10.1002/aet2.70022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.70022","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In emergency medicine (EM), language choice significantly impacts patient care and can potentially cause harm, dehumanize patients, and introduce bias. Stigmatizing language in medical settings can affect patient dignity, trust, and outcomes. Despite its importance, there is limited education on avoiding stigmatizing language in EM. This concept paper addresses the need to raise awareness and develop strategies for use of inclusive language in the emergency department (ED).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A didactic session titled “Words Matter: Destigmatizing the Language of Medicine” was developed and presented at the 2024 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Annual Meeting. The session involved a collaborative team of 12 individuals, including an EM resident, health equity fellow, and EM faculty. Content creation involved a comprehensive literature review and consensus-based decision making. The session featured current research related to stigmatizing language and interactive components, including case-based discussions and equity-focused alternative language choices.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The didactic session, attended by approximately 70 participants, successfully highlighted the impact of stigmatizing language on health care disparities and patient trust. Interactive case studies allowed participants to identify and propose alternatives to stigmatizing language. The session provided actionable strategies for integrating inclusive language into practice and education. Postdidactic discussions emphasized the need for ongoing research and specific educational interventions to address stigmatizing language in EM.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Addressing stigmatizing language in EM is crucial for providing equitable and respectful patient care. The didactic session demonstrated effective methods for raising awareness and training health care professionals in using inclusive language. Future efforts should focus on developing standardized approaches for identifying and mitigating stigmatizing language, integrating these practices into training programs, and conducting longitudinal research to assess the impact on patient outcomes. Creating a culture of inclusive language in the ED will contribute to improved patient trust and care quality.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":37032,"journal":{"name":"AEM Education and Training","volume":"9 S1","pages":"S101-S107"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143884042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Simanjit K. Mand MD, Holly Caretta-Weyer MD, MHPE, Corlin Jewell MD, Matthew Pirotte MD, Kevin R. Scott MD, MEd, Lalena M. Yarris MD, MCR, Benjamin H. Schnapp MD, MEd
Coaching supports many aspects of competency-based medical education, particularly by providing individualized instruction throughout the duration of the training experience. Many of the current recommendations regarding coaching have been established at the undergraduate medical education (UME) level. Although medical training is ideally envisioned as a continuum, trainees in graduate medical education (GME) are exposed to different learning environments, assessment processes, and sometimes more limited resources (institutional vs. departmental funding, personnel, and space) and time than their UME counterparts. These differences have important implications for the coaching approach needed for GME trainees. There are few papers that describe the specific trainee, residency program, and faculty coach characteristics to consider when designing a residency coaching program as well as the difference between a traditional coaching model and a coaching approach in medical education. The authors aim to specifically address coaching in GME and provide practical considerations for creating and implementing a coaching program for residents. Readers can use this as a framework to determine trainee-, program- and institution-specific needs when considering a coaching program for GME trainees.
{"title":"The coaching approach in graduate medical education: Practical considerations for program creation and implementation","authors":"Simanjit K. Mand MD, Holly Caretta-Weyer MD, MHPE, Corlin Jewell MD, Matthew Pirotte MD, Kevin R. Scott MD, MEd, Lalena M. Yarris MD, MCR, Benjamin H. Schnapp MD, MEd","doi":"10.1002/aet2.70019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.70019","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Coaching supports many aspects of competency-based medical education, particularly by providing individualized instruction throughout the duration of the training experience. Many of the current recommendations regarding coaching have been established at the undergraduate medical education (UME) level. Although medical training is ideally envisioned as a continuum, trainees in graduate medical education (GME) are exposed to different learning environments, assessment processes, and sometimes more limited resources (institutional vs. departmental funding, personnel, and space) and time than their UME counterparts. These differences have important implications for the coaching approach needed for GME trainees. There are few papers that describe the specific trainee, residency program, and faculty coach characteristics to consider when designing a residency coaching program as well as the difference between a traditional coaching model and a coaching approach in medical education. The authors aim to specifically address coaching in GME and provide practical considerations for creating and implementing a coaching program for residents. Readers can use this as a framework to determine trainee-, program- and institution-specific needs when considering a coaching program for GME trainees.</p>","PeriodicalId":37032,"journal":{"name":"AEM Education and Training","volume":"9 S1","pages":"S12-S23"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/aet2.70019","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143884078","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Guy Carmelli MD, MSEd, Michael Cassara DO, MSEd, Danielle T. Miller MD, MEd, Rebekah Cole PhD, MEd, Demian Szyld MD, EdM, Michael Gottlieb MD, Wendy C. Coates MD
While medical educators are publishing more than ever, many barriers still exist, causing some to feel disheartened. Ongoing strategies are desirable to support educators who are facing challenges when submitting and revising their scholarly manuscripts to journals. Increasing publication rates can enhance an educator's promotion and tenure progress and career satisfaction and aid in the establishment of a community of practice. On a broader scale, increased publication encourages a diversity of voices contributing to and advancing the field of medical knowledge. In this article, we present a guide for those looking to engage more deeply in medical education (MedEd) research and scholarship. First, we describe the difference between MedEd research (which seeks to develop and/or answer a research question and expand general knowledge) and other forms of scholarship (which may include, but are not limited to, curricular innovations, infographics, educational downloads, commentaries, editorials, reviews, last pages, instruments, case scenarios, and instructional toolboxes). Next, we discuss an eight-step process to prepare for publication: (1) formulate the idea, (2) implement the project, (3) select the appropriate journal, (4) write the paper, (5) submit the manuscript, (6) receive journal feedback, (7) revise the manuscript, and (8) resubmit the manuscript. It is the hope that with practice and mentorship, and the help of this guide, medical educators can more successfully publish their work moving forward.
{"title":"From submission to publication: A practical guide to peer review publication for medical educators","authors":"Guy Carmelli MD, MSEd, Michael Cassara DO, MSEd, Danielle T. Miller MD, MEd, Rebekah Cole PhD, MEd, Demian Szyld MD, EdM, Michael Gottlieb MD, Wendy C. Coates MD","doi":"10.1002/aet2.70023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.70023","url":null,"abstract":"<p>While medical educators are publishing more than ever, many barriers still exist, causing some to feel disheartened. Ongoing strategies are desirable to support educators who are facing challenges when submitting and revising their scholarly manuscripts to journals. Increasing publication rates can enhance an educator's promotion and tenure progress and career satisfaction and aid in the establishment of a community of practice. On a broader scale, increased publication encourages a diversity of voices contributing to and advancing the field of medical knowledge. In this article, we present a guide for those looking to engage more deeply in medical education (MedEd) research and scholarship. First, we describe the difference between MedEd research (which seeks to develop and/or answer a research question and expand general knowledge) and other forms of scholarship (which may include, but are not limited to, curricular innovations, infographics, educational downloads, commentaries, editorials, reviews, last pages, instruments, case scenarios, and instructional toolboxes). Next, we discuss an eight-step process to prepare for publication: (1) formulate the idea, (2) implement the project, (3) select the appropriate journal, (4) write the paper, (5) submit the manuscript, (6) receive journal feedback, (7) revise the manuscript, and (8) resubmit the manuscript. It is the hope that with practice and mentorship, and the help of this guide, medical educators can more successfully publish their work moving forward.</p>","PeriodicalId":37032,"journal":{"name":"AEM Education and Training","volume":"9 S1","pages":"S88-S100"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143883968","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jessica Baez MD, AEMUS-FPD, Andrew Adan MD, Sally Santen MD, PhD, Erin McDonough MD, Gregory Fermann MD, Elizabeth Leenellett MD
Background
Emergency medicine (EM) is a dynamic field requiring continual procedural proficiency, particularly in high-acuity, low-occurrence (HALO) procedures such as cricothyrotomy and transvenous pacemaker placement. Despite the importance of these skills, many EM faculty members face challenges maintaining proficiency due to limited time and exposure.
Objective of the Innovation
This faculty development initiative aimed to address skill degradation in HALO procedures and other critical clinical pathways among mid- and senior-career EM faculty.
Development Process and Implementation
Targeting 56 faculty members across a four-year EM training program, the initiative incorporated anonymous needs assessments and feedback from residents and consulting services. Over four years (2019–2023), eleven interactive sessions were delivered during faculty meetings and retreats, blending didactic presentations with hands-on practice.
Outcomes
Participation rates were high, with five topics achieving attendance over 100% through voluntary session repeats and spaced repetition. One-on-one workshops provided advanced training in airway management and ultrasound-guided procedures, with 49 faculty members attending. Feedback was overwhelmingly positive, with faculty endorsing continued participation in future sessions. As a result, participation in at least one session per year is now tied to value-based incentive compensation.
Conclusions
While challenges remain, such as expanding access and incentivizing attendance, the initiative underscores the critical importance of targeted faculty development to ensure ongoing competency in evolving clinical skills and procedures.
{"title":"Enhancing emergency medicine faculty development: A strategic approach to bridging clinical skill gaps","authors":"Jessica Baez MD, AEMUS-FPD, Andrew Adan MD, Sally Santen MD, PhD, Erin McDonough MD, Gregory Fermann MD, Elizabeth Leenellett MD","doi":"10.1002/aet2.70011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.70011","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Emergency medicine (EM) is a dynamic field requiring continual procedural proficiency, particularly in high-acuity, low-occurrence (HALO) procedures such as cricothyrotomy and transvenous pacemaker placement. Despite the importance of these skills, many EM faculty members face challenges maintaining proficiency due to limited time and exposure.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objective of the Innovation</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This faculty development initiative aimed to address skill degradation in HALO procedures and other critical clinical pathways among mid- and senior-career EM faculty.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Development Process and Implementation</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Targeting 56 faculty members across a four-year EM training program, the initiative incorporated anonymous needs assessments and feedback from residents and consulting services. Over four years (2019–2023), eleven interactive sessions were delivered during faculty meetings and retreats, blending didactic presentations with hands-on practice.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Outcomes</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Participation rates were high, with five topics achieving attendance over 100% through voluntary session repeats and spaced repetition. One-on-one workshops provided advanced training in airway management and ultrasound-guided procedures, with 49 faculty members attending. Feedback was overwhelmingly positive, with faculty endorsing continued participation in future sessions. As a result, participation in at least one session per year is now tied to value-based incentive compensation.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>While challenges remain, such as expanding access and incentivizing attendance, the initiative underscores the critical importance of targeted faculty development to ensure ongoing competency in evolving clinical skills and procedures.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":37032,"journal":{"name":"AEM Education and Training","volume":"9 S1","pages":"S61-S65"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/aet2.70011","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143884244","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Simanjit K. Mand MD, Sally A. Santen MD, PhD, Robin R. Hemphill MD, MPH, Benjamin H. Schnapp MD, MEd, Susan B. Promes MD, MBA, Jazmyn Shaw MD, Al’ai Alvarez MD, Stephen J. Cico MD, MEd, Sarah R. Williams MD, MHPE, PCC
Medical education faculty often take on the responsibility of helping their learners through professional or personal obstacles to achieve individual success. This can be challenging to navigate given the multiple “hats” that an individual faculty educator may wear, including coach, mentor, and advisor. Medical educators may feel uncertain as to which role may be most effective in any given interaction with a learner. Considering each as a communication strategy with unique skill sets and relational principles, rather than as a rigid role, can allow an educator more flexibility to use each approach in learner interactions. The authors discuss the separate modes of the coaching, mentoring, and advising approaches; the critical differences in relational and behavioral skills used; the potential pitfalls with each approach; and how feedback may fit into this framework. Once each approach is mastered, a medical educator may find it most effective to use a blended approach, weaving all three together intentionally, calling on each skill set as the need arises to support the learner.
{"title":"A blended approach: How to integrate coaching, mentoring, and advising as a medical educator","authors":"Simanjit K. Mand MD, Sally A. Santen MD, PhD, Robin R. Hemphill MD, MPH, Benjamin H. Schnapp MD, MEd, Susan B. Promes MD, MBA, Jazmyn Shaw MD, Al’ai Alvarez MD, Stephen J. Cico MD, MEd, Sarah R. Williams MD, MHPE, PCC","doi":"10.1002/aet2.70014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.70014","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Medical education faculty often take on the responsibility of helping their learners through professional or personal obstacles to achieve individual success. This can be challenging to navigate given the multiple “hats” that an individual faculty educator may wear, including coach, mentor, and advisor. Medical educators may feel uncertain as to which role may be most effective in any given interaction with a learner. Considering each as a communication strategy with unique skill sets and relational principles, rather than as a rigid role, can allow an educator more flexibility to use each approach in learner interactions. The authors discuss the separate modes of the coaching, mentoring, and advising approaches; the critical differences in relational and behavioral skills used; the potential pitfalls with each approach; and how feedback may fit into this framework. Once each approach is mastered, a medical educator may find it most effective to use a blended approach, weaving all three together intentionally, calling on each skill set as the need arises to support the learner.</p>","PeriodicalId":37032,"journal":{"name":"AEM Education and Training","volume":"9 S1","pages":"S24-S28"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/aet2.70014","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143884079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Joe-Ann S. Moser MD, MS, Nicholas Genes MD, PhD, FACEP, Daniel J. Hekman MS, Sara M. Krzyzaniak MD, Timothy A. Layng DO, Danielle Miller MD, MEd, Ashley C. Rider MD, MEHP, Selin T. Sagalowsky MD, MPH, Moira E. Smith MD, MPH, Benjamin H. Schnapp MD, MEd
<div> <section> <h3> Introduction</h3> <p>With the move toward competency-based medical education (CBME), data from the electronic health record (EHR) for informed self-improvement may be valuable as a part of programmatic assessment. Personalized dashboards are one way to view these clinical data. The purpose of this concept paper is to summarize the current state of clinical dashboards as they can be utilized by emergency medicine (EM) residency programs.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Methods</h3> <p>The author group consisted of EM physicians from multiple institutions with medical education and informatics backgrounds and was identified by querying faculty presenting on resident clinical dashboards at the 2024 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine conference. Additional authors were identified by members of the initial group. Best practice literature was referenced; if none was available, group consensus was used.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Categories of Metrics</h3> <p>Clinical exposures as well as efficiency, quality, documentation, and diversity metrics may be included in a resident dashboard. Resident dashboard metrics should focus on resident-sensitive measures rather than those primarily affected by attendings or systems-based factors.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Considerations for Implementation</h3> <p>Implementation of these dashboards requires the technical expertise to turn EHR data into actionable data, a process called EHR phenotyping. The dashboard can be housed directly in the EHR or on a separate platform. Dashboard developers should consider how their implementation plan will affect how often dashboard data will be refreshed and how to best display the data for ease of understanding.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Implications for Education & Training</h3> <p>Dashboards can provide objective data to residents, residency leadership and clinical competency committees as they identify areas of strength, growth areas, and set specific and actionable goals. The success of resident dashboards is reliant on resident buy-in and creating a culture of psychological safety through thoughtful implementation, coaching, and regular feedback. </p> </section> <section> <h3> Conclusion</h3> <p>Personalized clinical dashboards can play a crucial role in programmatic assessment within CBME, helping EM residents focus their efforts as th
随着以能力为基础的医学教育（CBME）的发展，来自电子健康记录（EHR）的数据作为项目评估的一部分可能很有价值。个性化仪表板是查看这些临床数据的一种方式。这篇概念论文的目的是总结临床仪表板的现状，因为它们可以被急诊医学（EM）住院医师计划所利用。方法作者组由来自多个机构的具有医学教育和信息学背景的急诊医师组成，通过查询2024年学术急诊医学学会（Society for Academic Emergency Medicine）会议住院医师临床仪表板上的教员来确定。其他作者由最初小组的成员确定。参考了最佳实践文献；如果没有可用的，则使用群体共识。临床暴露以及效率、质量、文档和多样性指标可以包括在常驻仪表板中。居民仪表板指标应侧重于对居民敏感的措施，而不是那些主要受主治医生或基于系统的因素影响的措施。这些仪表板的实现需要专业技术人员将EHR数据转化为可操作的数据，这一过程称为EHR表型。仪表板可以直接安装在电子病历中或单独的平台上。仪表板开发人员应该考虑他们的实现计划将如何影响仪表板数据刷新的频率，以及如何最好地显示数据以方便理解。对教育的启示&；培训仪表板可以为住院医师、住院医师领导和临床能力委员会提供客观的数据，因为他们可以确定优势领域、成长领域，并设定具体的、可操作的目标。居民仪表板的成功依赖于居民的认同，并通过深思熟虑的实施、指导和定期反馈来创造一种心理安全的文化。个性化临床仪表板可以在CBME的程序性评估中发挥关键作用，帮助EM住院医师在培训期间提高和完善技能。
{"title":"Resident clinical dashboards to support precision education in emergency medicine","authors":"Joe-Ann S. Moser MD, MS, Nicholas Genes MD, PhD, FACEP, Daniel J. Hekman MS, Sara M. Krzyzaniak MD, Timothy A. Layng DO, Danielle Miller MD, MEd, Ashley C. Rider MD, MEHP, Selin T. Sagalowsky MD, MPH, Moira E. Smith MD, MPH, Benjamin H. Schnapp MD, MEd","doi":"10.1002/aet2.70020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.70020","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>With the move toward competency-based medical education (CBME), data from the electronic health record (EHR) for informed self-improvement may be valuable as a part of programmatic assessment. Personalized dashboards are one way to view these clinical data. The purpose of this concept paper is to summarize the current state of clinical dashboards as they can be utilized by emergency medicine (EM) residency programs.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The author group consisted of EM physicians from multiple institutions with medical education and informatics backgrounds and was identified by querying faculty presenting on resident clinical dashboards at the 2024 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine conference. Additional authors were identified by members of the initial group. Best practice literature was referenced; if none was available, group consensus was used.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Categories of Metrics</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Clinical exposures as well as efficiency, quality, documentation, and diversity metrics may be included in a resident dashboard. Resident dashboard metrics should focus on resident-sensitive measures rather than those primarily affected by attendings or systems-based factors.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Considerations for Implementation</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Implementation of these dashboards requires the technical expertise to turn EHR data into actionable data, a process called EHR phenotyping. The dashboard can be housed directly in the EHR or on a separate platform. Dashboard developers should consider how their implementation plan will affect how often dashboard data will be refreshed and how to best display the data for ease of understanding.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Implications for Education & Training</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Dashboards can provide objective data to residents, residency leadership and clinical competency committees as they identify areas of strength, growth areas, and set specific and actionable goals. The success of resident dashboards is reliant on resident buy-in and creating a culture of psychological safety through thoughtful implementation, coaching, and regular feedback. </p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Personalized clinical dashboards can play a crucial role in programmatic assessment within CBME, helping EM residents focus their efforts as th","PeriodicalId":37032,"journal":{"name":"AEM Education and Training","volume":"9 S1","pages":"S29-S39"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/aet2.70020","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143884082","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Michelle D. Hughes MD, Tina H. Chen MD, Jessica C. Schoen MD, MS, Michael A. Lamberta MD, Michael Cassara DO, MSEd, Sara M. Hock MD, Lars K. Beattie MS, MD, Stephanie Stapleton MD, Hillary C. Moss MD, Jeffrey R. Heiferman MD, Julie C. Rice MD, MS
Introduction
Active learning engages learners in constructing knowledge through interactive strategies such as simulation, small-group discussion, and peer instruction. Although recognized as a superior approach to traditional passive learning, its adoption has been inconsistent. Barriers include reliance on traditional lectures, lack of training, and limited time to develop materials. Simulation educators have a unique skill set that may inform and support active learning initiatives.
Methods
Fifteen emergency medicine simulation experts convened to define the unique skill set of simulation educators and identify transferable simulation-based medical education (SBME) skills and concepts to promote effective active learning beyond the simulation lab. Workgroup members are simulation education directors who have undergone specialized training in SBME. During biweekly meetings over 6 months, workgroup members reviewed primary literature in SBME and active learning, along with relevant simulation educator training materials. Objectives were achieved through iterative review, group conceptualization, and expert consensus.
Unique treatment
The increasing prevalence of SBME in medical education, along with the growth of simulation fellowships, has produced a group of education experts with shared competencies. Simulation educators acquire expertise in psychological safety, facilitation, communication, and debriefing, through specialized training and extensive experience. These skills are critical for active learning environments where learners benefit from structured, engaging, and psychologically safe experiences.
Implications for educators
Key transferable SBME topics were identified for use in active learning environments outside of the simulation lab: (1) psychological safety, (2) facilitation strategies, and (3) communication techniques. Transferable tools and concepts were identified to promote efficacy and learner engagement during active learning in diverse environments. Simulation educators’ expertise is an underutilized resource for faculty development initiatives aimed at advancing active learning. This work advocates for leveraging simulation educators’ skills to close the active learning implementation gap, enhance learner outcomes, and meet the evolving needs of contemporary medical education.
{"title":"Bridging the gap: Leveraging simulation expertise to improve active learning environments","authors":"Michelle D. Hughes MD, Tina H. Chen MD, Jessica C. Schoen MD, MS, Michael A. Lamberta MD, Michael Cassara DO, MSEd, Sara M. Hock MD, Lars K. Beattie MS, MD, Stephanie Stapleton MD, Hillary C. Moss MD, Jeffrey R. Heiferman MD, Julie C. Rice MD, MS","doi":"10.1002/aet2.70021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.70021","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Active learning engages learners in constructing knowledge through interactive strategies such as simulation, small-group discussion, and peer instruction. Although recognized as a superior approach to traditional passive learning, its adoption has been inconsistent. Barriers include reliance on traditional lectures, lack of training, and limited time to develop materials. Simulation educators have a unique skill set that may inform and support active learning initiatives.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Fifteen emergency medicine simulation experts convened to define the unique skill set of simulation educators and identify transferable simulation-based medical education (SBME) skills and concepts to promote effective active learning beyond the simulation lab. Workgroup members are simulation education directors who have undergone specialized training in SBME. During biweekly meetings over 6 months, workgroup members reviewed primary literature in SBME and active learning, along with relevant simulation educator training materials. Objectives were achieved through iterative review, group conceptualization, and expert consensus.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Unique treatment</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The increasing prevalence of SBME in medical education, along with the growth of simulation fellowships, has produced a group of education experts with shared competencies. Simulation educators acquire expertise in psychological safety, facilitation, communication, and debriefing, through specialized training and extensive experience. These skills are critical for active learning environments where learners benefit from structured, engaging, and psychologically safe experiences.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Implications for educators</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Key transferable SBME topics were identified for use in active learning environments outside of the simulation lab: (1) psychological safety, (2) facilitation strategies, and (3) communication techniques. Transferable tools and concepts were identified to promote efficacy and learner engagement during active learning in diverse environments. Simulation educators’ expertise is an underutilized resource for faculty development initiatives aimed at advancing active learning. This work advocates for leveraging simulation educators’ skills to close the active learning implementation gap, enhance learner outcomes, and meet the evolving needs of contemporary medical education.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":37032,"journal":{"name":"AEM Education and Training","volume":"9 S1","pages":"S51-S60"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143883974","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Esther H. Chen MD, Carl Preiksaitis MD, MEd, Michelle Suh MD, Michael Gottlieb MD, Jaime Jordan MD, MA, Susan B. Promes MD, MBA
Can't stay up-to-date on the latest and greatest in emergency medicine education? The Academic Emergency Medicine Education and Training (AEMET) editorial board members present their must-read, practice-changing medical education articles published in the journal in 2023.
The authors report no financial conflict of interest.
{"title":"Ten must-read medical education articles of 2023","authors":"Esther H. Chen MD, Carl Preiksaitis MD, MEd, Michelle Suh MD, Michael Gottlieb MD, Jaime Jordan MD, MA, Susan B. Promes MD, MBA","doi":"10.1002/aet2.70012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.70012","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Can't stay up-to-date on the latest and greatest in emergency medicine education? The <i>Academic Emergency Medicine Education and Training (AEMET)</i> editorial board members present their must-read, practice-changing medical education articles published in the journal in 2023.</p><p>The authors report no financial conflict of interest.</p>","PeriodicalId":37032,"journal":{"name":"AEM Education and Training","volume":"9 S1","pages":"S5-S6"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/aet2.70012","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143884083","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号