A comprehensive, simulation-based approach to teaching clinical skills: the medical students' perspective.

The purpose of this study was to determine if third-year medical students participating in a mandatory 12-week simulation course perceived improvement in decision-making, communication, and teamwork skills. Students participated in or observed 24 acute emergency scenarios. At 4-week intervals, students completed 0-10 point Likert scale questionnaires evaluating the curriculum and role of team leader. Linear contrasts were used to examine changes in outcomes. P-values were Bonferroni-corrected for multiple pairwise comparisons. Student evaluations (n = 96) demonstrated increases from week 4 to 12 in educational value (p = 0.006), decision-making (p < 0.001), communication (p = 0.02), teamwork (p = 0.01), confidence in management (p < 0.001), and translation to clinical experience (p < 0.001). Regarding the team leader role, students reported a decrease in stress (p = 0.001) and increase in ability to facilitate team function (p < 0.001) and awareness of team building (p = <0.001). Ratings demonstrate a positive impact of simulation on both clinical management skills and team leadership skills. A simulation curriculum can enhance the ability to manage acute clinical problems and translates well to the clinical experience. These positive perceptions increase as the exposure to simulation increases.

Is boarding compromising our residents' education? A national survey of emergency medicine program directors.

Background: Boarding patients in the emergency department (ED) potentially affects resident education. Program director (PD) perceptions of the impact of boarding on their trainees have not been previously described. Methods: We surveyed a cross-sectional convenience sample of emergency medicine PDs using a mixed-methods approach to explore their perceptions of how boarding has affected their residents' training. Descriptive data were reported as percentages and differences were calculated using Pearson's chi-square test, with p < 0.05 considered significant. A framework model was used to qualitatively analyze free-text responses. Results: A total of 170 responses were collected, for a response rate of 63%. Most respondents felt that boarding had at least some effect on resident education with 29%, 35%, 18%, and 12% noting "a little," "a moderate amount," "a lot," and "a great deal," respectively, and 5% noting "no effect at all." Respondents perceived a negative impact of boarding on resident education and training, with 80% reporting a "somewhat" or "extremely negative" effect, 18% feeling neutral, and 2% noting a "somewhat positive" effect. Most noted a "somewhat" or "extremely negative" effect on resident education in managing ED throughput (70%) and high patient volumes (66%). Fifty-four percent noted a "somewhat" or "extremely negative" impact on being involved in the initial workup of undifferentiated patients. Thirty-two percent saw a "somewhat" or "extremely positive" effect on learning the management of critically ill patients. Qualitative analysis of challenges, mitigation strategies, and resident feedback emphasized the lack of exposure to managing departmental patient flow, impact on bedside teaching, and need for flexibility in resident staffing. Conclusions: Most PDs agree that boarding negatively affects resident education and identify several strategies to mitigate the impact. These findings can help inform future interventions to optimize resident learning in the complex educational landscape of high ED boarding.

LGBTQ+ individuals are not explicitly represented in emergency medicine simulation curricula.

Background: Medical educational societies have emphasized the inclusion of marginalized populations, including the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) population, in educational curricula. Lack of inclusion can contribute to health inequality and mistreatment due to unconscious bias. Little didactic time is spent on the care of LGBTQ+ individuals in emergency medicine (EM) curricula. Simulation based medical education can be a helpful pedagogy in teaching cross-cultural care and communication skills. In this study, we sought to determine the representation of the LGBTQ+ population in EM simulation curricula. We also sought to determine if representations of the LGBTQ+ population depicted stigmatized behavior. Methods: We reviewed 971 scenarios from six simulation case banks for LGBTQ+ representation. Frequency distributions were determined for major demographic variables. Chi-Squared or Fisher's Exact Test, depending on the cell counts, were used to determine if relationships existed between LGBTQ+ representation and bank type, author type, and stigmatized behavior. Results: Of the 971 scenarios reviewed, eight (0.82%) scenarios explicitly represented LGBTQ+ patients, 319 (32.85%) represented heterosexual patients, and the remaining 644 (66.32%) did not specify these patient characteristics. All cases representing LGBTQ+ patients were found in institutional case banks. Three of the eight cases depicted stigmatized behavior. Conclusions: LGBTQ+ individuals are not typically explicitly represented in EM simulation curricula. LGBTQ+ individuals should be more explicitly represented to reduce stigma, allow EM trainees to practice using gender affirming language, address health conditions affecting the LGBTQ+ population, and address possible bias when treating LGBTQ+ patients.

Reconceptualizing the emergency medicine resident scholarly requirement: Proposed framework and rubric.

Background: The completion of a scholarly project is a common program requirement by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) for all residency training programs. However, the implementation can vary significantly between programs. Lack of generalizable standards for scholarly projects required of all trainees within ACGME-accredited residencies has led to a large range of quality and effort put forth to complete these projects. Our goal is to introduce a framework and propose a corresponding rubric for application to resident scholarship to quantify and qualify the components of scholarship to better measure resident scholarly output across the graduate medical education (GME) continuum. Methods: Eight experienced educators and members of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Education Committee were selected to explore the current scholarly project guidelines and propose a definition that can be universally applied to diverse training programs. Following a review of the current literature, the authors engaged in iterative, divergent, and convergent discussions via meetings and asynchronous dialogue to develop a framework and associated rubric. Results: The group proposes that emergency medicine (EM) resident scholarship should (1) involve a structured process, (2) generate outcomes, (3) be disseminated, and (4) be peer reviewed. These components of resident scholarly activity are achieved whether this is a single project encompassing all four domains, or multiple smaller projects that sum to the whole. To assist residency programs in assessing a given individual resident's achievement of the standards set forth, a rubric is proposed. Conclusion: Based on current literature and consensus, we propose a framework and rubric for tracking of resident scholarly project achievement in an effort to elevate and advance EM scholarship. Future work should explore the optimal application of this framework and define minimal scholarship goals for EM resident scholarship.

Trends in nursing feedback for emergency medicine residents: A mixed-methods survey analysis of national practices.

Background: Feedback is critical for physician development. Multisource feedback is especially important in a team-based specialty such as emergency medicine (EM) and is required by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Nursing assessments provide a unique perspective, but little is known about the current national patterns of their collection and use in EM. Methods: We surveyed EM program directors using a mixed-methods approach to explore the use of nursing assessment of EM residents. Descriptive data were reported as absolute numbers and percentages. An adjunct analysis of free-text responses was done using the framework method. Results: The response rate for our survey was 63% (190 responses), of which 84% currently collect nursing feedback. Respondents from 94% of programs agreed that nursing feedback is useful in assessing professionalism and respondents from 92% of programs agreed that nursing feedback is useful in assessing communication and interpersonal skills, while 44% agreed that it is useful in informing resident medical knowledge. Forty-two percent reported that nursing feedback did not directly influence residents' progression through their training, while 2% indicated that such feedback played a significant role in leading to dismissal or probation. The majority of programs (64%) that do not collect feedback from nurses have done so in the past and hope to do so in the future. Qualitative analysis revealed themes of logistic challenges with data collection, concern regarding quality of feedback, and retributive or gender-disparate feedback. Conclusions: Nursing assessments of EM residents were collected by most responding programs and majority of those who do not collect them presently wish to do so in the future. They were considered particularly useful in the assessment of interpersonal skills, communication, and professionalism. However, lack of uniform methods for collecting assessment that meaningfully informs resident development and progression represents a challenge and direction for future inquiry.

The impact of interviewer characteristics on residency candidate scores in Emergency Medicine: a brief report.

Background: At the conclusion of residency candidate interview days, faculty interviewers commonly meet as a group to reach conclusions about candidate evaluations based on shared information. These conclusions ultimately translate into rank list position for The Residency Match. The primary objective is to determine if the post-interview discussion influences the final scores assigned by each interviewer, and to investigate whether interviewer characteristics are significantly associated with the likelihood of changing their score. Based on Foucault's 'theory of discourse' and Bourdieu's 'social capital theory,' we hypothesized that interviewer characteristics, and the discourse itself, would contribute to score changes after a post-interview discussion regarding emergency medicine residency candidates. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study of candidate scores for all candidates to a four-year emergency medicine residency program affiliated with Yale University School of Medicine during a single application cycle. The magnitude and direction of score changes, if any, after group discussion were plotted and grouped by interviewer academic rank. We created a logistic regression model to determine the odds that candidate scores changed from pre- and post-discussion ratings related to specific interviewer factors. Results: A total of 24 interviewers and 211 candidates created 471 unique interviewer-candidate scoring interactions, with 216 (45.8%) changing post-discussion. All interviewers ranked junior to professor were significantly more likely to change their score compared to professors. Interviewers who were women had significantly lower odds of changing their individual scores following group discussion (p=0.020; OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26-0.89). Conclusions: Interviewers with lower academic rank had higher odds of changing their post-discussion scores of residency candidates compared to professors. Future work is needed to further characterize the influencing factors and could help create more equitable decision processes during the residency candidate ranking process.

Resident Perceptions of a Publicly Disclosed Daily Productivity Dashboard.

INTRODUCTION: Following resident requests, we created a public metrics dashboard to inform residents of their daily productivity. Our goal was to iteratively improve the dashboard based on resident feedback and to measure the impact of reviewing aggregate data on self-perceived productivity. METHODS: A 10-question anonymous survey was completed by our postgraduate year 1-3 residents. Residents answered questions on the dashboard and rated their own productivity before and after reviewing aggregate peer-comparison data. Using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test we calculated summary statistics for survey questions and compared distributions of pre- and post-test, self-rated productivity scores. RESULTS: All 43 eligible residents completed the survey (response rate 100%). Thirteen (30%) residents "rarely" or "never" reviewed the dashboard. No respondents felt the dashboard measured their productivity or quality of care "extremely accurately" or "very accurately." Seven (16%) residents felt "very" or "extremely pressured" to change their practice patterns based on the metrics provided, and 28 (65%) would have preferred private over public feedback. Fifteen residents (35%) changed their self-perceived rank after viewing peer-comparison data, although not significantly in a particular direction (z = 0.71, P = 0.48). CONCLUSION: Residents did not view the presented metrics as reflective of their productivity or quality of care. Viewing the dashboard did not lead to statistically significant changes in resident self-perception of productivity. This finding highlights the need for expanding the resident conversation and education on metrics, given their frequent inclusion in attending physician workforce payment and incentive models.

Meeting expectations: An exploration of academic emergency medicine faculty experiences and preferences in the virtual meeting environment by age, gender and parental status.

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, virtual meetings became the norm in academic emergency medicine (EM) departments. This study explores the experiences of academic EM faculty within this environment. Methods: In 2021, authors surveyed a cross-sectional convenience sample of EM faculty using a mixed-methods approach to explore perceptions of the virtual meeting environment. Authors reported data on a five-point Likert scale, summarized as percentages, and calculated differences using Pearson's chi-squared test, where p < 0.05 was significant. Free text responses were analyzed qualitatively. Results: Two-hundred-fifty-nine responses were collected, (female [55.6%], ≤40 years old, [39.8%]) of which 33.2% had children ≤7 years old. Most respondents felt the total number of virtual meetings had increased and were more likely to happen outside of regular business hours compared to in-person meetings. Most faculty preferred meetings during regular hours and liked the virtual format overall. Younger faculty respondents were more polarized in their preferences of timing of meetings and reported more pressure to accept meetings outside of regular hours. Female respondents with young children were more likely to dislike meetings outside regular hours and to have declined them. Women faculty, younger faculty, and women faculty with young children were significantly more likely to agree that women had been "more impacted by the new virtual work environment." Qualitative themes highlighting the flexibility provided by the virtual work environment and decreased commuting time, though many felt communication was limited in virtual meetings. Conclusions: Academic EM faculty mostly preferred keeping meetings during regular business hours and in a virtual format. Experiences varied by age but not by gender overall. Women with young children reported greater challenges than women without. Men did not differ by parental status. The virtual format provided increased flexibility but limited communication and engagement. Academic EM departments may use this data to inform future meeting practices.

Differences in faculty feedback for high, expected, and below-expected clinically performing emergency medicine residents.

Objectives: A lifelong pursuit such as medicine is frequently paired with a framework of "deliberate practice" for improvement. It is unclear whether the quality of feedback varies across different learner levels. Our study aims to assess whether a difference exists in the quality of feedback delivered to high-, expected-, and below-expected performer emergency medicine (EM) residents based on their attending-identified performance level. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of written EM resident feedback collected between November 2018 and March 2021. Clinical performance level was subjectively determined by attending faculty in their feedback. Feedback was coded on a scale from 0-5 based on the presence (1) or absence (0) of the items modified from the Ende's SMART criteria: Specific (S), Measurable (M), Achievable (A), Relevant (R), and Time-bound (T). The primary outcome was any total modified SMART criteria score difference concerning performance level using logistic regression with Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE). Secondary outcomes were differences for individual criteria. Results: We analyzed 1284 evaluations (311 high performers, 930 expected performers, and 43 below-expected performers) of 94 unique residents from 66 different evaluators. Mean total modified SMART scores were significantly higher in high and below-expected performers than those designated as expected performers by faculty evaluators. Achievable and Relevant written feedback was provided to high performers in a significantly larger proportion than expected and below-expected performers. Only 278 out of 1284 evaluations met criteria for Specific. Conclusions: Mean total modified SMART feedback scores were significantly greater in high performers and below-expected performers when compared to expected performers. Achievable and Relevant feedback was provided in greater proportions to high performer residents compared to expected and below-expected performers. These findings are a challenge to academic faculty to engage in quality feedback delivery for residents at all performance levels.

Socially distanced, virtually connected: Faculty and resident perceptions of virtual didactics.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, emergency medicine (EM) residency programs have transitioned from traditional in-person to virtual synchronous didactics to comply with social distancing guidelines. This study explores the perceptions of EM residents and faculty regarding this new virtual format. METHODS: This was a multicenter, cross-sectional study at five EM residencies using a mixed-methods approach to investigate resident and faculty perceptions of virtual didactics. Institutions selected reflect different program lengths and geographic locations. Quantitative data measured on a Likert scale were summarized as percentages. Differences were calculated using Welch's t-test and chi-square, where p < 0.05 was significant. Open-ended responses were analyzed qualitatively. RESULTS: Our response rate was 64% (n = 141) for residents and 48% (n = 108) for faculty. Fifty-one percent of faculty and 54% of residents felt that they were more likely to attend virtually than in person. Among residents, 77% felt that they were more likely to attend virtual conferences during vacation or elective rotations. Perceived retention of information from virtual sessions was perceived to be the same or better for 69% of residents and 58% of faculty. Residents felt that they paid more attention in the virtual format (29% vs. 26%, p = 0.037). Both groups missed the social interactions of in-person conference (86% of faculty, 75% of residents). Respondents from both groups felt that < 20% of total didactic time should remain virtual once social distancing recommendations are lifted. Qualitative analysis revealed recommendations from residents and faculty to optimize lecture style and interactivity. Decreased commute time and ability to multitask at home increased wellness for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: While benefits of virtual didactics were acknowledged, residents and faculty missed the social interaction of in-person conference and preferred < 20% of future didactics to be virtual. Further research should assess the difference in knowledge acquisition and retention between conference models.

Successful Implementation of a Resident Liaison to Medical Students in Emergency Medicine Rotations.

BACKGROUND: As the role of the resident-as-teacher grows, some residents are inspired to develop themselves early as leaders in education while in training. We describe the successful implementation of a resident liaison (RL) to medical students in emergency medicine (EM) as a way to develop resident leaders in medical education. METHODS: This position was implemented to develop interested residents as leaders in medical education and to provide medical students access to an EM physician who is closer to their training level and may be more approachable than the clerkship director. RLs are mentored by the clerkship director and are involved in curricular programming and education research. RESULTS: This innovation has strengthened our student EM rotations and has provided residents with a unique opportunity to explore a career in medical education. Residents have made tangible contributions to our educational programming in this role and have pursued careers in medical education. The program has been recognized as a "best practice" by students and the school of medicine. CONCLUSIONS: The RL initiative has conferred significant benefits to residents and medical students. Implementation of a RL program may benefit EM rotations outside of our institution and perhaps outside of the EM specialty.

Implementation of a Physician Assistant Emergency Medicine Residency Within a Physician Residency.

Physician assistants (PA) are an important part of emergency department healthcare delivery and are increasingly seeking specialty-specific postgraduate training. Our goal was to pilot the implementation of a PA postgraduate program within an existing physician residency program and produce emergency medicine-PA (EM-PA) graduates of comparable skill to their physician counterparts who have received the equivalent length of EM residency training to date (evaluated at the end of first year of EM training).The curriculum was based on the Society for Emergency Medicine Physician Assistants (SEMPA) recommendations with a special focus on side-by-side training with EM resident physicians. In reviewing the program, the authors examined faculty evaluations, as well as procedure and ultrasound experience that the trainees received. We found comparable evaluations between first-year EM-PA and physician trainee cohorts. This program serves as a pilot study to demonstrate the feasibility of collocating clinical and didactic programming for physicians and EM-PAs during their postgraduate training. This brief innovation report outlines the logistics of the clinical and didactic curriculum and provides a summary of outcomes evaluated.

An Innovative Feedback Tool Leading to Improved Faculty Feedback and Positive Reception by Residents.

INTRODUCTION: In 2012 the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education implemented trainee milestones as tools for clinical competency committees to use for evaluation, feedback, remediation, and promotion purposes. Prior to this innovation, there has not been an adequate method to capture, organize, and graphically illustrate the evaluations by attendings in a simple, fast and organized fashion. METHODS: We created a novel, web-based, mobile-friendly evaluation tool to help fill this identified gap. The survey-based program creates a milestone-based evaluation, takes only a few minutes to complete, and easily collates the results in a graphic format creating an individualized "dashboard." The dashboard is then used by both trainees and their evaluators as a feedback platform. RESULTS: With the implementation of the dashboard, educational leadership has noted an increase in the number of submitted evaluations of residents and the amount of face-to-face feedback given by attendings to residents. A post-implementation survey of the residents revealed that they found the dashboard-provided feedback more helpful than prior modes of feedback, although the number of evaluations was still too few. CONCLUSION: The use of our feedback dashboard is useful to multiple targeted end-users, including general faculty evaluators, program leadership, and the residents themselves for gathering formative feedback that is specific and timely. This tool is adaptable and likely generalizable to other residency programs and specialties.

"To Err Is Human" but Disclosure Must be Taught: A Simulation-Based Assessment Study.

INTRODUCTION: Although error disclosure is critical in promoting safety and patient-centered care, physicians are inconsistently trained in its practice, and few objective methods to assess competence exist. We used an immersive simulation scenario to determine whether providers with varying levels of clinical experience adhere to the disclosure safe practice guidelines when exposed to a serious adverse event simulation scenario. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study with medical students, junior emergency medicine (EM) residents (PGY 1-2), senior EM residents (PGY 3-4), and attending EM physicians participating in a simulated case in which a scripted medication overdose resulted in an adverse event. Each scenario was videotaped and scored by two expert raters based on a 6-component, 21-point disclosure assessment instrument. RESULTS: There were 12 participants in each study group (N = 48). There was good interrater reliability (κ = 0.70). Total scores improved significantly as the level of training increased: medical student = 10.3 (2.7), PGY 1-2 = 12.3 (6.2), PGY 3-4 = 13.7 (3.2), and attending physicians = 12.8 (3.7) (P = 0.03). Seventy-five percent of participants did not address preventing recurrence of the error. Fifty-six percent offered no apology or only offered it with prompting from the patient; only 23% offered an apology with the initial disclosure. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated suboptimal adherence to best practices guidelines for error disclosure when providers are assessed in an immersive simulation setting. Despite a correlation in performance of medical error disclosure with increased physician experience, this study suggests that healthcare providers may need additional training to comply with safe practice guidelines for disclosure of unanticipated adverse events.

Emergency department evaluation and treatment of wrist injuries.

Correct diagnosis of wrist injuries is critical in preventing prolonged pain and dysfunction. Radiographs cannot diagnose a large percentage of injuries. Wrist sprain is considered one of the most common yet most treacherous emergency department (ED) diagnoses because radiographs do not always rule out all acute injuries. Knowledge of the anatomy, normal physical examination findings, and physical examination abnormalities associated with different pathological conditions, is paramount in making the correct diagnosis. This article focuses on the anatomy, diagnosis, and ED management of acute wrist injuries, including fractures and dislocations.

Emergency Medicine Residents Consistently Rate Themselves Higher than Attending Assessments on ACGME Milestones.

INTRODUCTION: In 2012 the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) introduced the Next Accreditation System (NAS), which implemented milestones to assess the competency of residents and fellows. While attending evaluation and feedback is crucial for resident development, perhaps equally important is a resident's self-assessment. If a resident does not accurately self-assess, clinical and professional progress may be compromised. The objective of our study was to compare emergency medicine (EM) resident milestone evaluation by EM faculty with the same resident's self-assessment. METHODS: This is an observational, cross-sectional study that was performed at an academic, four-year EM residency program. Twenty-five randomly chosen residents completed milestone self-assessment using eight ACGME sub-competencies deemed by residency leadership as representative of core EM principles. These residents were also evaluated by 20 faculty members. The milestone levels were evaluated on a nine-point scale. We calculated the average difference between resident self-ratings and faculty ratings, and used sample t-tests to determine statistical significance of the difference in scores. RESULTS: Eighteen residents evaluated themselves. Each resident was assessed by an average of 16 attendings (min=10, max=20). Residents gave themselves statistically significant higher milestone ratings than attendings did for each sub-competency examined (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Residents over-estimated their abilities in every sub-competency assessed. This underscores the importance of feedback and assessment transparency. More attention needs to be paid to methods by which residency leadership can make residents' self-perception of their clinical ability more congruent with that of their teachers and evaluators. The major limitation of our study is small sample size of both residents and attendings.

Drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms: two emergency department cases.

Drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is a rare, severe adverse drug event that appears with a generalized rash, fevers, and dysfunction of 1 or more organ systems. We describe 2 patients (1 adult and 1 pediatric) seen in the emergency department with DRESS, and review the clinical presentations, potential complications, and management of DRESS. Although rare, it can be associated with significant morbidity, including liver failure and death, and should be considered in the differential diagnosis of patients with diffuse rash and systemic symptoms.