CAEP 2016 Academic Symposium on Education Scholarship: Training our Future Clinician Educators in Emergency Medicine.

OBJECTIVE: To develop consensus recommendations for training future clinician educators (CEs) in emergency medicine (EM). METHODS: A panel of EM education leaders was assembled from across Canada and met regularly by teleconference over the course of 1 year. Recommendations for CE training were drafted based on the panel's experience, a literature review, and a survey of current and past EM education leaders in Canada. Feedback was sought from attendees at the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) annual academic symposium. Recommendations were distributed to the society's Academic Section for further feedback and updated by a consensus of the expert panel. RESULTS: Recommendations were categorized for one of three audiences: 1) Future CEs; 2) Academic departments and divisions (AD&D) that support training to fulfill their education leadership goals; and 3) The CAEP Academic Section. Advanced medical education training is recommended for any emergency physician or resident who pursues an education leadership role. Individuals should seek out mentorship in making decisions about career opportunities and training options. AD&D should regularly perform a needs assessment of their future CE needs and identify and encourage potential individuals who fulfill education leadership roles. AD&D should develop training opportunities at their institution, provide support to complete this training, and advocate for the recognition of education scholarship in their institutional promotions process. The CAEP Academic Section should support mentorship of future CEs on a national scale. CONCLUSION: These recommendations serve as a framework for training and supporting the next generation of Canadian EM medical educators.

Implementation of a novel prehospital advance directive protocol in southeastern Ontario.

INTRODUCTION: Do not resuscitate (DNR) orders are commonly accepted in most health care settings, but are less widely recognized in the prehospital setting. We describe the implementation of and satisfaction with a prehospital DNR protocol that allows paramedics to honour verbal and non-standard written DNR requests. METHODS: This prospective observational study reviewed all cardiac arrests in southeastern Ontario between March 1, 2003 and September 31, 2005. Following a verbal or non-standard written DNR request, paramedics completed a questionnaire and a follow-up structured telephone interview was conducted with surrogate decision makers (SDMs). RESULTS: There were 1890 cardiac arrests during the study period, of which 86 met our inclusion criteria. Paramedic surveys were available for 82 cases (95%), and surrogate decision makers (SDMs) were successfully contacted in 50 (58%) of them. Two SDMs declined to be interviewed. The mean patient age was 72.7 (standard deviation 13.8) years and 65% were male. Sixty-three (73%) of DNR requests were verbal, and 23 (27%) were written. The mean paramedic comfort was rated 4.9 on a 5-point Likert scale (with 5 being "very comfortable") (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.9-5.0). The mean SDM comfort was rated by paramedics as 4.9 (95% CI 4.8-4.9). SDMs reported comfort in withholding CPR in 47 of 48 cases (98%), and with paramedic care in all cases. One SDM stated that although it was consistent with the patient's wishes, she was uncomfortable having to make the DNR request. CONCLUSIONS: Satisfaction with this novel prehospital DNR protocol was uniformly high among paramedic and SDM respondents. It appears that such a protocol is feasible and acceptable for the prehospital setting. Our conclusions are limited by a small sample size, the lack of a comparison group, and limited follow-up.