AEM Education and Training最新文献

Background

Simulation-based procedural practice is crucial to emergency medicine skills training and maintenance. However, many commercial procedural models are either nonexistent or lacking in key elements. Simulationists often create their own novel models with minimal framework for designing, building, and validation. We propose two interlinked frameworks with the goal to systematically build and validate models for the desired educational outcomes.

Methods

Simulation Academy Research Committee and members with novel model development expertise assembled as the MIDAS (Model Innovation, Development and Assessment for Simulation) working group. This working group focused on improving novel model creation and validation beginning with a preconference workshop at 2023 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Annual Meeting. The MIDAS group sought to (1) assess the current state of novel model validation and (2) develop frameworks for the broader simulation community to create, improve, and validate procedural models.

Findings

Workshop participants completed 17 surveys for a response rate of 100%. Many simulationists have created models but few have validated them. The most common barriers to validation were lack of standardized guidelines and familiarity with the validation process.

We have combined principles from education and engineering fields into two interlinked frameworks. The first is centered on steps involved with model creation and refinement. The second is a framework for novel model validation processes.

Implications

These frameworks emphasize development of models through a deliberate, form-follows-function methodology, aimed at ensuring training quality through novel models. Following a blueprint of how to create, test, and improve models can save innovators time and energy, which in turn can yield greater and more plentiful innovation at lower time and financial cost. This guideline allows for more standardized approaches to model creation, thus improving future scholarship on novel models.

Background

Just-in-time training (JITT) occurs in the clinical context when learners need immediate guidance for procedures due to a lack of proficiency or the need for knowledge refreshment. The master adaptive learner (MAL) framework presents a comprehensive model of transforming learners into adaptive experts, proficient not only in their current tasks but also in the ongoing development of lifelong skills. With the evolving landscape of procedural competence in emergency medicine (EM), trainees must develop the capacity to acquire and master new techniques consistently. This concept paper will discuss using JITT to support the development of MALs in the emergency department.

Methods

In May 2023, an expert panel from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Medical Educator's Boot Camp delivered a comprehensive half-day preconference session entitled “Be the Best Teacher” at the society's annual meeting. A subgroup within this panel focused on applying the MAL framework to JITT. This subgroup collaboratively developed a practical guide that underwent iterative review and refinement.

Results

The MAL-JITT framework integrates the learner's past experiences with the educator's proficiency, allowing the educational experience to address the unique requirements of each case. We outline a structured five-step process for applying JITT, utilizing the lumbar puncture procedure as an example of integrating the MAL stages of planning, learning, assessing, and adjusting. This innovative approach facilitates prompt procedural competence and cultivates a positive learning environment that fosters acquiring adaptable learning skills with enduring benefits throughout the learner's career trajectory.

Conclusions

JITT for procedures holds the potential to cultivate a dynamic learning environment conducive to nurturing the development of MALs in EM.

Background

The impact of opioid use disorder (OUD) in the United States continues to rise, yet this topic has limited coverage in most medical school curricula. The study partnered with academic and community harm reductionists to design a peer-assisted learning case of opioid withdrawal to teach fourth-year medical students about trauma-informed OUD care and harm reduction services during their emergency medicine clerkship.

Methods

Academic and community harm reductionists iteratively codesigned this case in partnership with the research team. Community-engaged pedagogy informed this process to promote social action and power sharing through education. This case was integrated into the existing weekly peer-assisted learning curriculum (i.e., medical students teaching medical students through a structured case) for all fourth-year medical students during their required emergency medicine clinical rotation. Participants completed a postcase evaluation survey.

Results

Sixty-four medical students completed the survey between June and November 2022. A total of 98.5% of participants found the educational session quite or extremely relevant to their medical education, and 87.5% believed the case to be quite or extremely effective in achieving the learning objectives. A total of 45.3% initially felt quite or extremely competent in talking with patients about their drug use, whereas 53.2% felt quite or extremely more competent after participating in the case. Finally, 21.9% initially felt quite or extremely competent in proposing a treatment plan for a patient who uses drugs, whereas 62.5% felt quite or extremely more competent after participating in the case.

Conclusions

This study supports the feasibility and importance of incorporating the voices of people with lived and living experience into medical school curricular development. This peer-assisted learning case focused on the treatment of OUD in the emergency department was seamlessly integrated into the existing curriculum and well received by medical students. By engaging local experts, it could easily be adapted and expanded to other sites.

Objective

The core content of emergency medicine (EM) residency training includes the management of oncologic emergencies; however, documented knowledge gaps continue to exist in this subtopic. This study represents a targeted needs assessment as indicated by Step 2 of Kern's curriculum design to determine the specific training gaps to be addressed within the oncologic EM curriculum.

Methods

A multi-institutional cross-sectional survey of oncologists (surgical and medical) and emergency physicians (attendings and residents) was conducted during 2023 at five institutions. The voluntary survey consisted of general and specialty-specific questions exploring gaps in oncologic emergency–specific training/education topics. Descriptive statistics reported responses as frequencies and percentages.

Results

Of the 833 surveys sent across the five sites, 302 (36.3%) were accessed by link; of these, 271 (89.7%) surveys were completed. There were no differences in the responses between early and later respondents and no differences in the characteristics of respondents between sites. A vast majority of the oncologist and EM groups (91.2% and 83.0%, respectively) reported a belief that emergency physicians would benefit from additional oncologic emergency training. Our survey identified 16 important topics for inclusion in an oncologic EM curriculum, including five topics not present on the 2022 Model of Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine.

Conclusions

Based on this needs assessment, an oncologic EM curriculum should include the topics listed under oncologic emergencies in the 2022 Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine along with our respondent-identified topics of radiation therapy adverse effects, stem cell transplant complications, and the management of cancer-specific postsurgical complications, pain, and common diseases in patients with cancer.

Background

Global emergency medicine (GEM) is situated at the intersection of global health and emergency medicine (EM), which is built upon a history of colonial systems and institutions that continue to reinforce inequities between high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) today. These power imbalances yield disparities in GEM practice, research, and education.

Approach

The Global Emergency Medicine Academy (GEMA) of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine formed the Decolonizing GEM Working Group in 2020, which now includes over 100 worldwide members. The mission is to address colonial legacies in GEM and catalyze sustainable changes and recommendations toward decolonization at individual and institutional levels. To develop recommendations to decolonize GEM, the group conducted a nonsystematic review of existing literature on decolonizing global health, followed by in-depth discussions between academics from LMICs and HICs to explore implications and challenges specific to GEM. We then synthesized actionable solutions to provide recommendations on decolonizing GEM.

Results

Despite the rapidly expanding body of literature on decolonizing global health, there is little guidance specific to the relatively new field of GEM. By applying decolonizing principles to GEM, we suggest key priorities for improving equity in academic GEM: (1) reframing partnerships to place LMIC academics in positions of expertise and power, (2) redirecting research funding toward LMIC-driven projects and investigators, (3) creating more equitable practices in establishing authorship, and (4) upholding principles of decolonization in the education of EM trainees from LMICs and HICs.

Conclusions

Understanding the colonial roots of GEM will allow us to look more critically at current health disparities and identify inequitable institutionalized practices within our profession that continue to uphold these misguided concepts. A decolonized future of GEM depends on our recognition and rectification of colonial-era practices that shape structural determinants of health care delivery and scientific advancement.

Objectives

This needs assessment aimed to improve understanding of flexible endoscopic intubation training and practice in emergency medicine (EM), providing insights to educators and practice leaders seeking to improve education and practices.

Methods

We conducted a multicenter, mixed-methods needs assessment of emergency physicians (EPs) incorporating focus groups and a survey. Focus groups comprised community EPs, academic EPs, and resident EPs. We analyzed focus group transcripts using grounded theory, qualitatively describing EM endoscopic intubation. The qualitative analysis shaped our survey instrument, which we deployed in cross-sectional fashion. We report survey data with descriptive statistics.

Results

Focus groups with 13 EPs identified three themes: indications for use of endoscopic intubation, factors impacting a physician's decision to endoscopically intubate, and attaining and maintaining endoscopic intubation competency. Of 257 surveyed EPs (33% response rate), 79% had received endoscopic intubation training during residency, though 82% had performed this procedure 10 or fewer times in their career. Despite 97% acknowledging the necessity of competency, only 23% felt highly confident in their ability to perform endoscopic intubation. Participants (93%) reported scarce opportunities to perform the procedure and identified factors believed to facilitate competency acquisition and maintenance, including opportunities to perform endoscopic intubation in practice (98%), local champions (93%), and performing nasopharyngoscopy (87%).

Conclusions

While most EPs acknowledged the importance of competency in endoscopic intubation, they reported scarce procedural opportunities and commonly expressed low confidence. Further research is needed on this topic, and we propose avenues to enhance education and practices related to endoscopic intubation. These include development of robust procedural curricula, support of local champions, and incorporating nasopharyngoscopy into EM practice.