The emergency physician and knowledge transfer: continuing medical education, continuing professional development, and self-improvement.

A workshop session from the 2007 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference, Knowledge Translation in Emergency Medicine: Establishing a Research Agenda and Guide Map for Evidence Uptake, focused on developing a research agenda for continuing medical education (CME) in knowledge transfer. Based on quasi-Delphi methodology at the conference session, and subsequent electronic discussion and refinement, the following recommendations are made: 1) Adaptable tools should be developed, validated, and psychometrically tested for needs assessment. 2) "Point of care" learning within a clinical context should be evaluated as a tool for practice changes and improved knowledge transfer. 3) The addition of a CME component to technological platforms, such as search engines and databases, simulation technology, and clinical decision-support systems, may help knowledge transfer for clinicians or increase utilization of these tools and should, therefore, be evaluated. 4) Further research should focus on identifying the appropriate outcomes for physician CME. Emergency medicine researchers should transition from previous media-comparison research agendas to a more rigorous qualitative focus that takes into account needs assessment, instructional design, implementation, provider change, and care change. 5) In the setting of continued physician learning, barriers to the subsequent implementation of knowledge transfer and behavioral changes of physicians should be elicited through research.

Integrating the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Core competencies into the model of the clinical practice of emergency medicine.

In response to public pressure for greater accountability from the medical profession, a transformation is occurring in the approach to medical education and assessment of physician competency. Over the past 5 years, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) has implemented the Outcomes and General Competencies projects to better ensure that physicians are appropriately trained in the knowledge and skills of their specialties. Concurrently, the American Board of Medical Specialties, including the American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM), has embraced the competency concept. The core competencies have been integral in ABEM's development of Emergency Medicine Continuous Certification and the development of the Model of Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine (Model). ABEM has used the Model as a significant part of its blueprint for the written and oral certification examinations in emergency medicine and is fully supportive of the effort to more fully define and integrate the ACGME core competencies into training emergency medicine specialists. To incorporate these competencies into our specialty, an Emergency Medicine Competency Taskforce (Taskforce) was formed by the Residency Review Committee-Emergency Medicine to determine how these general competencies fit in the Model. This article represents a consensus of the Taskforce with the input of multiple organizations in emergency medicine. It provides a framework for organizations such as the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine to develop a curriculum in emergency medicine and program requirement revisions by the Residency Review Committee-Emergency Medicine. In this report, we describe the approach taken by the Taskforce to integrate the ACGME core competencies into the Model. Ultimately, as competency-based assessment is implemented in emergency medicine training, program directors, governing bodies such as the ACGME, and individual patients can be assured that physicians are competent in emergency medicine.

The status of bedside ultrasonography training in emergency medicine residency programs.

UNLABELLED: Bedside ultrasonography (BU) is rapidly being incorporated into emergency medicine (EM) training programs and clinical practice. In the past decade, several organizations in EM have issued position statements on the use of this technology. Program training content is currently driven by the recently published "Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine," which includes BU as a necessary skill. OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to determine the current status of BU training in EM residency programs. METHODS: A survey was mailed in early 2001 to all 122 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited EM residency programs. The survey instrument asked whether BU was currently being taught, how much didactic and hands-on training time was incorporated into the curriculum, and what specialty representation was present in the faculty instructors. In addition, questions concerning the type of tests performed, the number considered necessary for competency, the role of BU in clinical decision making, and the type of quality assurance program were included in the survey. RESULTS: A total of 96 out of 122 surveys were completed (response rate of 79%). Ninety-one EM programs (95% of respondents) reported they teach BU, either clinically and/or didactically, as part of their formal residency curriculum. Eighty-one (89%) respondents reported their residency program or primary hospital emergency department (ED) had a dedicated ultrasound machine. BU was performed most commonly for the following: the FAST scan (focused abdominal sonography for trauma, 79/87%); cardiac examination (for tamponade, pulseless electrical activity, etc., 65/71%); transabdominal (for intrauterine pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, etc., 58/64%); and transvaginal (for intrauterine pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, etc., 45/49%). One to ten hours of lecture on BU was provided in 43%, and one to ten hours of hands-on clinical instruction was provided in 48% of the EM programs. Emergency physicians were identified as the faculty most commonly involved in teaching BU to EM residents (86/95%). Sixty-one (69%) programs reported that EM faculty and/or residents made clinical decisions and patient dispositions based on the ED BU interpretation alone. Fourteen (19%) programs reported that no formal quality assurance program was in place. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of ACGME-accredited EM residency programs currently incorporate BU training as part of their curriculum. The majority of BU instruction is done by EM faculty. The most commonly performed BU study is the FAST scan. The didactic component and clinical time devoted to BU instruction are variable between programs. Further standardization of training requirements between programs may promote increasing standardization of BU in future EM practice.