RESUMO
Acute ischemic stroke affects over 800,000 US adults annually, with hundreds of thousands more experiencing a transient ischemic attack. Emergent evaluation, prompt acute treatment, and identification of stroke or TIA (transient ischemic attack) etiology for specific secondary prevention are critical for decreasing further morbidity and mortality of cerebrovascular disease. The Biomarkers of Acute Stroke Etiology (BASE) study is a multicenter observational study to identify serum markers defining the etiology of acute ischemic stroke. Observational trial of patients presenting to the hospital within 24 h of stroke onset. Blood samples are collected at arrival, 24, and 48 h later, and RNA gene expression is utilized to identify stroke etiology marker candidates. The BASE study began January 2014. At the time of writing, there are 22 recruiting sites. Enrollment is ongoing, expected to hit 1000 patients by March 2017. The BASE study could potentially aid in focusing the initial diagnostic evaluation to determine stroke etiology, with more rapidly initiated targeted evaluations and secondary prevention strategies.Clinical Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02014896 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02014896?term=biomarkers+of+acute+stroke+etiology&rank=1.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Faculty involvement in resident teaching events is beneficial to resident education, yet evidence about the factors that promote faculty attendance at resident didactic conferences is limited. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether offering continuing medical education (CME) credits would result in an increase in faculty attendance at weekly emergency medicine conferences and whether faculty would report the availability of CME credit as a motivating factor. METHODS: Our prospective, multi-site, observational study of 5 emergency medicine residency programs collected information on the number of faculty members present at CME and non-CME lectures for 9 months and collected information from faculty on factors influencing decisions to attend resident educational events and from residents on factors influencing their learning experience. RESULTS: Lectures offering CME credit on average were attended by 5 additional faculty members per hour, compared with conferences that did not offer CME credit (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.9-6.1; P < .001). Faculty reported their desire to "participate in resident education" was the most influential factor prompting them to attend lectures, followed by "explore current trends in emergency medicine" and the lecture's "specific topic." Faculty also reported that "clinical/administrative duties" and "family responsibilities" negatively affected their ability to attend. Residents reported that the most important positive factor influencing their conference experience was "lectures given by faculty." CONCLUSIONS: Although faculty reported that CME credit was not an important factor in their decision to attend resident conferences, offering CME credit resulted in significant increases in faculty attendance. Residents reported that "lectures given by faculty" and "faculty attendance" positively affected their learning experience.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: An increasing number of emergency medicine (EM) residency training programs have residents interested in participating in clinical rotations in other countries. However, the policies that each individual training program applies to this process are different. To our knowledge, little has been done in the standardization of these experiences to help EM residency programs with the evaluation, administration and implementation of a successful global health clinical elective experience. The objective of this project was to assess the current status of EM global health electives at residency training programs and to establish recommendations from educators in EM on the best methodology to implement successful global health electives. METHODS: During the 2011 Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) Academic Assembly, participants met to address this issue in a mediated discussion session and working group. Session participants examined data previously obtained via the CORD online listserve, discussed best practices in global health applications, evaluations and partnerships, and explored possible solutions to some of the challenges. In addition a survey was sent to CORD members prior to the 2011 Academic Assembly to evaluate the resources and processes for EM residents' global experiences. RESULTS: Recommendations included creating a global health working group within the organization, optimizing a clearinghouse of elective opportunities for residents and standardizing elective application materials, site evaluations and resident assessment/feedback methods. The survey showed that 71.4% of respondents have global health partnerships and electives. However, only 36.7% of programs require pre-departure training, and only 20% have formal competency requirements for these global health electives. CONCLUSIONS: A large number of EM training programs have global health experiences available, but these electives and the trainees may benefit from additional institutional support and formalized structure.
