IFEM model curriculum: emergency medicine learning outcomes for undergraduate medical education.

BACKGROUND: The International Federation for Emergency Medicine (IFEM) published its model curriculum for medical student education in emergency medicine in 2009. Because of the evolving principles of emergency medicine and medical education, driven by societal, professional, and educational developments, there was a need for an update on IFEM recommendations. The main objective of the update process was creating Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs) and providing tier-based recommendations. METHOD: A consensus methodology combining nominal group and modified Delphi methods was used. The nominal group had 15 members representing eight countries in six regions. The process began with a review of the 2009 curriculum by IFEM Core Curriculum and Education Committee (CCEC) members, followed by a three-phase update process involving survey creation [The final survey document included 55 items in 4 sections, namely, participant & context information (16 items), intended learning outcomes (6 items), principles unique to emergency medicine (20 items), and content unique to emergency medicine (13 items)], participant selection from IFEM member countries and survey implementation, and data analysis to create the recommendations. RESULTS: Out of 112 invitees (CCEC members and IFEM member country nominees), 57 (50.9%) participants from 27 countries participated. Eighteen (31.6%) participants were from LMICs, while 39 (68.4%) were from HICs. Forty-four (77.2%) participants have been involved with medical students' emergency medicine training for more than five years in their careers, and 56 (98.2%) have been involved with medical students' training in the last five years. Thirty-five (61.4%) participants have completed a form of training in medical education. The exercise resulted in the formulation of tiered ILO recommendations. Tier 1 ILOs are recommended for all medical schools, Tier 2 ILOs are recommended for medical schools based on perceived local healthcare system needs and/or adequate resources, and Tier 3 ILOs should be considered for medical schools based on perceived local healthcare system needs and/or adequate resources. CONCLUSION: The updated IFEM ILO recommendations are designed to be applicable across diverse educational and healthcare settings. These recommendations aim to provide a clear framework for medical schools to prepare graduates with essential emergency care capabilities immediately after completing medical school. The successful distribution and implementation of these recommendations hinge on support from faculty and administrators, ensuring that future healthcare professionals are well-prepared for emergency medical care.

Mentorship and how to conduct research: A research primer for low- and middle-income countries.

Development of a successful research program can seem daunting when looked at from the starting line. It will take years if not decades to succeed and become sustainable. It requires local partnerships and mentoring; it mandates the establishment of review boards; it requires national health policies to allow for protected time for research in salaries and for fund granting agencies to be set up; it requires training of researchers and support staff as well as a change in the mindset of clinical staff on the floor. It will almost inevitably require international support of some kind for low- and middle-income country researchers, be it university programs or other academic or private institutions. Success can occur; most likely it will occur by partnering with local research experts outside of emergency medicine in some combination with international networks and mentoring. Perhaps the most critical elements to success are intellectual curiosity and a burning flame of passion - and neither of those carry a financial cost.

A Multi-mRNA Host-Response Molecular Blood Test for the Diagnosis and Prognosis of Acute Infections and Sepsis: Proceedings from a Clinical Advisory Panel.

Current diagnostics are insufficient for diagnosis and prognosis of acute infections and sepsis. Clinical decisions including prescription and timing of antibiotics, ordering of additional diagnostics and level-of-care decisions rely on understanding etiology and implications of a clinical presentation. Host mRNA signatures can differentiate infectious from noninfectious etiologies, bacterial from viral infections, and predict 30-day mortality. The 29-host-mRNA blood-based InSepTM test (Inflammatix, Burlingame, CA, formerly known as HostDxTM Sepsis) combines machine learning algorithms with a rapid point-of-care platform with less than 30 min turnaround time to enable rapid diagnosis of acute infections and sepsis, as well as prediction of disease severity. A scientific advisory panel including emergency medicine, infectious disease, intensive care and clinical pathology physicians discussed technical and clinical requirements in preparation of successful introduction of InSep into the market. Topics included intended use; patient populations of greatest need; patient journey and sample flow in the emergency department (ED) and beyond; clinical and biomarker-based decision algorithms; performance characteristics for clinical utility; assay and instrument requirements; and result readouts. The panel identified clear demand for a solution like InSep, requirements regarding test performance and interpretability, and a need for focused medical education due to the innovative but complex nature of the result readout. Innovative diagnostic solutions such as the InSep test could improve management of patients with suspected acute infections and sepsis in the ED, thereby lessening the overall burden of these conditions on patients and the healthcare system.

Assessment of Pain Management During Interfacility Air Medical Transport of Intubated Patients.

OBJECTIVE: The management of pain is an important component of care in the prehospital and transport setting. However, recent evidence suggests that pain control is infrequently achieved in these settings. The objective of the current study was to determine the proportion and frequency of opioid analgesia provided to intubated patients during interfacility transport by an air medical transport system. METHODS: This was a health records review examining electronic records of intubated patients transported by Ornge from July 2015 to November 2015. Cases were identified using Ornge database, and intubated patients were selected based on the inclusion criteria. A standardized data extraction form was piloted and used by a single trained data extractor. The primary outcome was whether analgesia was provided. Secondary outcomes included the frequency of administration and dose adequacy of an opioid analgesia; the analgesic used; adverse events; and the impact of age, sex, past medical history of chronic pain, or reason for transfer on pain management. RESULTS: Of the 500 potential patient transports, 448 met our inclusion criteria. Among the 448 patients, 295 (65.8%) were men, 327 (73.0%) received analgesia, and 211 (64.3%) received more than 1 dose during transport (median frequency of 2 doses, interquartile range = 1 to 3). The average transport time was 135 minutes, and repeated dosing (> 1 repeat dose) occurred primarily (45.5%) in transports of over 180 minutes. Fentanyl was the most commonly used analgesic (97.9%), and the most common dose was 50 µg (51.8%). Adverse events occurred in 8 patients (2.5%), most commonly new hypotension (mean arterial pressure < 65 mm Hg, n = 5). There was no significant difference in the administration of analgesia based on the patient's age or sex (68.0% of female patients and 75.6% of male patients received analgesia). Interestingly, only 30.8% of patients repatriated to their originating hospital received analgesia compared with 72.3% of patients undergoing their initial transfer to a higher level of care. CONCLUSION: Seventy-three percent of intubated patients transported by Ornge received an opioid analgesic, most commonly fentanyl. We found no clinically relevant difference in the administration of analgesics based on age, sex, past medical history of chronic pain, or reason for transfer other than repatriation to the originating hospital.

Opioid Use Disorder Assessment Tools and Drug Screening.

Opioid use disorder risk assessment tools cannot be used in isolation. In combination with standardized clinical examination, and, when indicated, urine drug screening, a validated risk assessment tool, improves the ability to detect opioid misuse. Even though no single tool has been shown to have both high interobserver reliability and high sensitivity, the standardized approach has still been shown to be superior to subjective care giver assessment. This article will provide a global approach to risk assessment in addition to reviewing the available tools.

Evaluation of pain management in medical transfer of trauma patients by air.

OBJECTIVES: With regionalized trauma care, medical transport times can be prolonged, requiring paramedics to manage patient care and symptoms. Our objective was to evaluate pain management during air transport of trauma patients. METHODS: We conducted a 12-month review of electronic paramedic records from a provincial critical care transport agency. Patients were included if they were ≥18 years old and underwent air transport to a trauma centre, and excluded if they were Glasgow Coma Scale score <14, intubated, or accompanied by a physician or nurse. Demographics, injury description, and transportation parameters were recorded. Outcomes included pain assessment via 11-point numerical rating scale, patterns of analgesia administration, and analgesia-related adverse events. Results were reported as mean ± standard deviation, [range], (percentage). RESULTS: We included 372 patients: 47.0 years old; 262 males; 361 blunt injuries. Transport duration was 82.4 ± 46.3 minutes. In 232 (62.4%) patients who received analgesia, baseline numerical rating scale was 5.9 ± 2.5. Fentanyl was most commonly administered at 44.3 [25-60] mcg. Numerical rating scale after first analgesia dose decreased by 1.1 [-2-7]. Thereafter, 171 (73.7%) patients received 2.4 [1-18] additional doses. While 44 (23.4%) patients had no change in numerical rating scale after first analgesia dose, subsequent doses resulted in no change in numerical rating scale in over 65% of patients. There were 43 adverse events recorded, with nausea the most commonly reported (39.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Initial and subsequent dose(s) of analgesic had minimal effect on pain as assessed via numerical rating scale, likely due in part to inadequate dosing. Future research is required to determine and address the barriers to proper analgesia.

OBJECTIF: Compte tenu de la régionalisation des soins en traumatologie, la durée des transports pour raison médicale peut être prolongée, ce qui oblige les ambulanciers paramédicaux à traiter les symptômes et à donner des soins. L'étude visait donc à évaluer le soulagement de la douleur durant le transport aérien des polytraumatisés. MÉTHODE: L'étude consistait en un examen de dossiers électroniques d'ambulanciers paramédicaux, provenant d'une agence provinciale de transport de blessés en phase critique, sur une période de 12 mois. Les critères d'inclusion comprenaient un âge ≥ 18 ans et le transport aérien vers un centre de traumatologie; et les critères d'exclusion, un score < 14 sur l'échelle de Glasgow, l'intubation ou l'accompagnement d'un médecin ou d'une infirmière. La collecte d'éléments factuels se composait de données démographiques, de renseignements sur les blessures et de paramètres relatifs au transport. Les résultats étudiés comprenaient l'évaluation de la douleur sur une échelle numérique de 11 points, les modes d'administration des analgésiques et les événements indésirables liés à l'analgésie. Les résultats sont exprimés sous forme de moyenne ± l'écart type [fourchette], (pourcentage). RÉSULTATS: Ont été retenus dans l'étude 372 patients : âge : 47,0 ans; hommes : 262; contusions : 361. La durée de transport était de 82,4 ± 46,3 minutes. Parmi les 232 patients (62,4%) qui ont reçu des analgésiques, la douleur au départ s'élevait à 5,9 ± 2,5 sur l'échelle numérique. Le médicament le plus souvent administré était le fentanyl, à raison de 44,3 µg [25­60]. Une diminution de l'intensité de la douleur de 1,1 [-2­7] sur l'échelle numérique a été enregistrée après la première dose d'analgésique; par la suite, 171 patients (73,7%) ont reçu 2,4 doses additionnelles [1­18]. De leur côté, 44 patients (23,4%) n'ont noté aucun changement sur l'échelle numérique après la première dose d'analgésique, et les doses suivantes n'ont rien changé à l'évaluation de la douleur chez plus de 65% des patients. Enfin, 43 événements indésirables ont été enregistrés, dont le plus fréquent était les nausées (39,5%). CONCLUSIONS: Les doses initiales et subséquentes d'analgésiques ont eu peu d'effets sur le soulagement de la douleur, selon l'évaluation faite sur l'échelle numérique, probablement en raison d'un dosage inadéquat, du moins en partie. Aussi faudrait-il mener des études sur les obstacles à l'administration d'une analgésie appropriée et sur la manière de les vaincre.

Acute Pain Management in the Year 2018-A Review.

This review article provides an overview of acute pain management. It highlights the need to provide balanced pain care while limiting harm from opioids as per the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations for balanced pain care. Opiophobia and its impact on the use of opioids for acute severe pain are discussed. Interventions that can improve global pain care and the role of pain scales in the management of acute pain are discussed. Newer trends in acute pain management in the emergency department (ED) are also reviewed and include: low dose ketamine, intravenous lidocaine, ultra-sound guided regional anesthesia, intravenous paracetamol, and patient controlled analgesia.

An Environmental Scan of Academic Emergency Medicine at the 17 Canadian Medical Schools: Why Does this Matter to Emergency Physicians?

OBJECTIVE: We sought to conduct a major objective of the CAEP Academic Section, an environmental scan of the academic emergency medicine programs across the 17 Canadian medical schools. METHODS: We developed an 84-question questionnaire, which was distributed to academic heads. The responses were validated by phone by the lead author to ensure that the questions were answered completely and consistently. Details of pediatric emergency medicine units were excluded from the scan. RESULTS: At eight of 17 universities, emergency medicine has full departmental status and at two it has no official academic status. Canadian academic emergency medicine is practiced at 46 major teaching hospitals and 13 specialized pediatric hospitals. Another 69 Canadian hospital EDs regularly take clinical clerks and emergency medicine residents. There are 31 full professors of emergency medicine in Canada. Teaching programs are strong with clerkships offered at 16/17 universities, CCFP(EM) programs at 17/17, and RCPSC residency programs at 14/17. Fourteen sites have at least one physician with a Master's degree in education. There are 55 clinical researchers with salary support at 13 universities. Sixteen sites have published peer-reviewed papers in the past five years, ranging from four to 235 per site. Annual budgets range from $200,000 to $5,900,000. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive review of academic activities in emergency medicine across Canada identifies areas of strengths as well as opportunities for improvement. CAEP and the Academic Section hope we can ultimately improve ED patient care by sharing best academic practices and becoming better teachers, educators, and researchers.

Analysis of h-index and other bibliometric markers of productivity and repercussion of a selected sample of worldwide emergency medicine researchers.

OBJECTIVE: To explore bibliometric markers in a worldwide sample of emergency physician investigators to define global, continental and individual patterns over time. METHODS: We evaluated the number of papers published, citations received, cumulative impact factor and h-index of editorial board members of six international emergency medicine journals. We calculated the individual values for every year of each author's career to evaluate their dynamic evolution. We analysed the results by researcher world area and growth rate. RESULTS: We included 107 researchers (76 American, 21 European and 10 Australasian; 46 slow-rate -group C-, 43 medium-rate -group B- and 18 fast-rate growth -group A-). The median experience was 18 (IQR: 12) years, without subgroups differences. Dynamic analysis over time showed good fit with quadratic function in all individual researchers and for all bibliometric markers (R2: 0.505-0.997), with the h-index achieving the best R2. The combined analysis of the h-index of the 107 investigators also fit the quadratic model (R2=0.49). Analysis by predefined continental and growth-rate subgroups allowed defining specific patterns (R2 between 0.46-0.54 and 0.80-0.86, respectively): by continents, American researchers' h-index increased 0.632 points per year, European 0.417 and Australasian 0.341; by growth rate, researchers from group A, B and C increased 1.239, 0.683 and 0.320, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic analysis of every individual author indicator over time has a very good fit with a quadratic model, with the h-index achieving the best R2. It is also possible to construct models based on continent and rate of growth that could help to predict future expected outcomes of researchers in a particular subgroup and to classify new emerging researchers by growth rate.

Relationship between category size and journals' impact factor: implications for emergency medicine journals and researchers.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the relationship between the size of the 39 Journal Citation Reports (JCR) medical categories and impact factor (IF) of journals in these categories, and the implications that it might have for emergency medicine (EM) journals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the 2010 JCR database, we calculated the mean IF, 5-year IF (5y-IF), Eigenfactor (EF), and Article Influence (AI) scores including all journals for each category. We also calculated a 'weighted IF' for all journals by dividing each journal IF by the mean IF of its category. We ranked EM journals according to IF and 'weighted IF' into all the journals included in the 39 categories. We assessed the relationship between category size and bibliometric scores by linear regression. RESULTS: Category size varied from 252 journals (Pharmacology and Pharmacy) to 14 (Primary Healthcare), EM category occupying the 36th position (23 journals). The mean IF of EM category ranked in 34th position, 5-yIF in 32nd, EF in 34th, and AI in 34th position. Category size had a direct and significant association with mean IF, 5y-IF, and AI but not with mean EF. When the EM journals were ranked among all the journals according to their IF, only two (9%) were placed into the first quartile and raised up to eight (35%) when 'weighted IF' was considered. CONCLUSION: There is a negative relationship between JCR size category and IF achieved by the journals. This places EM journals at a clear disadvantage because they represent one of the smallest clinical medical research disciplines.

Premedications for infliximab infusions do not impact the risk of acute adverse drug reactions.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify the association of premedication with the adverse drug reaction (ADR) rate in infliximab infusions. DESIGN: A retrospective chart review of 684 patients who received 4077 infusions in a network of community clinics over 16.5 months. Data collected included age, weight, sex, diagnosis, dose, premedications and ADR information, which was coded for time of onset, severity and outcome. SETTING: Community infusion clinics located in Ontario, Canada. PATIENTS: Patients aged 12-91 years who receive regular infliximab infusions to treat their autoimmune condition, mainly either Crohn's disease or rheumatoid arthritis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The number of infusions to the occurrence of an acute ADR by presence of premedication. RESULTS: ADRs are not significantly different (χ2(1, n=644, p=0.651)=0.204) between those who always received premedications and those who never did. When controlling for age, sex, weight and diagnosis, patients receiving premedications were just as likely to experience an ADR as patients who never received any (OR 1.1, 95% CI 0.7 to 1.9, p=0.5). When assessing the number of infusions to the occurrence of an ADR using the Kaplan-Meier method, no significant difference was found between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of premedications is not associated with a decreased risk of ADR in patients receiving infliximab. This held true for patients who had never had an ADR prior to receiving premedications and while controlling for age, sex, weight and diagnosis.

The safety of infliximab infusions in the community setting.

BACKGROUND: Tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNFalpha) has an important role in the pathogenesis of inflammatory conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis and psoriasis. Infliximab, a chimeric anti-TNFalpha monoclonal antibody, has been shown to reduce the severity of symptoms or induces remission of active disease. Infusions have generally been limited to the hospital setting due to cost and concerns for patient safety. Studies defining its efficacy and safety have, therefore, originated almost exclusively from hospital settings. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of infliximab in a community clinic environment, across all types of patients. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 3161 patients who received a combined 20,976 infusions at a network of community clinics over 16.5 months was conducted. Adverse drug reaction (ADR) information was retrieved and coded for time of onset, severity and outcome. Only ADRs that occurred during or within the first 24 h of the infusion were included. RESULTS: A total of 524 (2.5% of all infusions) acute ADRs in 353 patients (11.2%) were recorded. Most reactions (ie, ADRs) were mild (n=263 [50.2%, 1.3% of all infusions]) or moderate (n=233 [44.5%, 1.1% of all infusions]). Twenty-eight reactions (5.3%, 0.1% of all infusions) were severe. Emergency medical services were called to transport patients to hospital for seven of the severe reactions, of which none required admission. As per pre-established medical directives, adrenaline was administered three times. CONCLUSIONS: Infliximab infusions are safe in the community setting. Severe ADRs were rare. None required active physician intervention; nurses were able to treat all reactions by following standardized medical directives.

The impact on patient flow after the integration of nurse practitioners and physician assistants in 6 Ontario emergency departments.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the impact of the integration of the new roles of primary health care nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) on patient flow, wait times and proportions of patients who left without being seen in 6 Ontario emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of health records data on patient arrival time, time of initial assessment by a physician, time of discharge from the ED and discharge status. RESULTS: Whether a PA or NP was directly involved in the care of patients or indirectly involved by being on duty, the wait times, lengths of stay and proportion of patients who left without being seen were significantly reduced. When a PA or NP were directly involved in patients' care, patients were 1.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-2.1, p < 0.05) and 2.1 (95% CI 1.6-2.8, p < 0.05) times more likely to be seen within the wait time benchmarks, respectively. Lengths of stay were 30.3% (95% CI 21.6%-39.0%, p < 0.01) and 48.8% (95% CI 35.0%-62.7%, p < 0.01) lower when PAs and NPs, respectively, were involved. When PAs and NPs were not on duty, the proportion of patients who left without being seen were 44% (95% CI 31%-63%, p < 0.01) and 71% (95% CI 53%-96%, p < 0.05), respectively. CONCLUSION: The addition of PAs or NPs to the ED team can improve patient flow in medium-sized community hospital EDs. Given the ongoing shortage of physicians, use of alternative health care providers should be considered. These results require validation, as their generalizability to other locations or types of EDs is not known.

The application of change management principles to facilitate the introduction of nurse practitioners and physician assistants into six Ontario emergency departments.

In a project funded by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, MedEmerg facilitated the introduction of three new providers into six emergency departments. A managed change process that included team development was carried out. Increased team awareness and a higher acceptance of the provider roles were some of the key successes. Challenges included role confusion and the learning curve for the new providers. While overall the project was a success, lessons learned included the need for physician buy-in, communication, planning for unintended consequences and management of expectations. The project emphasized the importance of a managed process, including team development, in the implementation of change.