Resource Utilization and Emergency Medicine Advisors' Approach to Video Interview Preparation.

Introduction The Standardized Video Interview (SVI) was a residency application component introduced by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) as a supplement to the existing process, which aimed to measure knowledge of professional behaviors and interpersonal skills. Given its novelty in both aim and execution, little advice or experience was available to inform preparation strategies. We sought to perform a cross-sectional analysis to explore advisors' practices in guiding students' preparation for the SVI. Methods An electronic questionnaire was developed and piloted for flow and usability, then distributed to all members of the Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine (CORD EM), the professional society for emergency medicine educators, via listserv, comprised of 270 residency programs. Questions were both open- and closed-ended and therefore analyzed in a mixed-method fashion.  Results We received 56 responses from a listserv representing 270 residency programs. Respondents cited personal experience and consensus opinions from national organizations as the primary sources for their advice. The most common resources offered to students were space for completing the SVI (41%) or technical support for completing the SVI (47%). The time committed to student advising specifically for the SVI ranged from zero to 20 hours. Estimated associated costs of preparation ranged from zero up to $10,000 (time plus resources). Two individuals reported recommending commercial preparation resources to students.  Conclusion The SVI was a novel attempt to augment the resident application process. We found variability in resources and advice offered to students, including broad ranges of time dedicated, the monetary value of resources contributed, and the types of resources utilized. As the global COVID-19 pandemic has inspired a wave of innovation and process changes, we present this data for consideration as a snapshot of the variable responses to a single uniform process change.

Emergency medicine clerkship director experience adapting emergency remote learning during the onset of COVID-19 pandemic.

Objectives: The recent outbreak of the COVID-19 altered the traditional paradigm of clinical medical education. While individual clerkships have shared their curricular adaptations via social and academic networking media, there is currently no organizational standard in establishing a nonclinical, emergency medicine (EM) virtual rotation (VR). The primary objective of this study was to describe EM clerkship directors' (CDs) perspectives on their experience adapting an EM VR curriculum during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A 21-item survey with quantitative and qualitative questions was disseminated between June and August 2020 to EM CDs via the Clerkship Director of Emergency Medicine Listserv to describe their experience and perspectives in adapting a VR during spring 2020. Results: We analyzed 59 of 77 EM clerkship survey responses. Among respondents, 52% adapted a VR while 47.5% did not. Of those who adapted a VR, 71% of CDs had 2 weeks or less to develop the new curriculum, with 84% reporting usual or increased clinical load during that time. Clerkships significantly diversified their asynchronous educational content and utilized several instructional models to substitute the loss of clinical experience. Reflecting on the experience, 71% of CDs did not feel comfortable writing a standardized letter of evaluation for students based on the VR, with the majority citing inability to evaluate students' competencies in a clinical context. Conclusion: A crisis such as COVID-19 necessitates change in all facets of medical education. While EM educators demonstrated the ability to create emergency remote learning with limited time, this was not equivalent to the formal development of preplanned VR experiences. Future faculty development and curriculum innovation are required to fully transition an in-person immersive experience to a noninferior virtual experience.

COVID-19: A Driver for Disruptive Innovation of the Emergency Medicine Residency Application Process.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on undergraduate medical education with limitation of patient care activities and disruption to medical licensing examinations. In an effort to promote both safety and equity, the emergency medicine (EM) community has recommended no away rotations for EM applicants and entirely virtual interviews during this year's residency application cycle. These changes affect the components of the EM residency application most highly regarded by program directors - Standardized Letters of Evaluation from EM rotations, board scores, and interactions during the interview. The Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine Application Process Improvement Committee suggests solutions not only for the upcoming year but also to address longstanding difficulties within the process, encouraging residency programs to leverage these challenges as an opportunity for disruptive innovation.

Addressing Challenges in Obtaining Emergency Medicine Away Rotations and Standardized Letters of Evaluation Due to COVID-19 Pandemic.

The Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine (CORD) Advising Students Committee in Emergency Medicine (ASC-EM) anticipates institutional and regional variability in both the spread and response to COVID-19. Travel restrictions and host institution rotation closures will impact the number of emergency medicine (EM) rotations EM-bound medical students can complete in an unprecedented manner. They may prevent students from completing any away rotations this academic cycle, challenging the students' ability to obtain EM Standardized Letters of Evaluation (SLOEs). EM's emphasis on residency group SLOEs over other letter types creates an undue burden on these vulnerable students and makes the application process intrinsically inequitable. This inequity warrants a reevaluation of the current application practice. This article outlines ASC-EM's proposed recommendations for all stakeholders, including EM program leadership, medical schools, and EM-bound medical students, to consider for the upcoming EM application cycle.