Too Big Too Fast? Potential Implications of the Rapid Increase in Emergency Medicine Residency Positions

Emergency medicine (EM) has expanded rapidly since its inception in 1979. Workforce projections from current data demonstrate a rapid rise in the number of accredited EM residency programs and trainee positions. Based on these trends, the specialty may soon reach a point of saturation, particularly in urban areas. This could negatively impact future trainees entering the job market as well as the career plans of medical students. More time and resources should be devoted to obtaining accurate projections, assessing the distribution of emergency physicians in rural versus urban settings, and implementing central workforce planning to protect the future of graduating trainees.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154425/1/aet210400.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154425/2/aet210400_am.pd

Zooming In Versus Flying Out: Virtual Residency Interviews in the Era of COVID‐19

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163370/2/aet210486.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163370/1/aet210486_am.pd

Scholarly Tracks in Emergency Medicine

Over the past decade, some residency programs in emergency medicine (EM) have implemented scholarly tracks into their curricula. The goal of the scholarly track is to identify a niche in which each trainee focuses his or her scholarly work during residency. The object of this paper is to discuss the current use, structure, and success of resident scholarly tracks. A working group of residency program leaders who had implemented scholarly tracks into their residency programs collated their approaches, implementation, and early outcomes through a survey disseminated through the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) list-serve. At the 2009 CORD Academic Assembly, a session was held and attended by approximately 80 CORD members where the results were disseminated and discussed. The group examined the literature, discussed the successes and challenges faced during implementation and maintenance of the tracks, and developed a list of recommendations for successful incorporation of the scholarly track structure into a residency program. Our information comes from the experience at eight training programs (five 3-year and three 4-year programs), ranging from 8 to 14 residents per year. Two programs have been working with academic tracks for 8 years. Recommendations included creating clear goals and objectives for each track, matching track topics with faculty expertise, protecting time for both faculty and residents, and providing adequate mentorship for the residents. In summary, scholarly tracks encourage the trainee to develop an academic or clinical niche within EM during residency training. The benefits include increased overall resident satisfaction, increased success at obtaining faculty and fellowship positions after residency, and increased production of scholarly work. We believe that this model will also encourage increased numbers of trainees to choose careers in academic medicine.ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2010; 17:S87–S94 © 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency MedicinePeer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/79229/1/j.1553-2712.2010.00890.x.pd

Comparison of the Standardized Video Interview and Interview Assessments of Professionalism and Interpersonal Communication Skills in Emergency Medicine

ObjectivesThe Association of American Medical Colleges Standardized Video Interview (SVI) was recently added as a component of emergency medicine (EM) residency applications to provide additional information about interpersonal communication skills (ICS) and knowledge of professionalism (PROF) behaviors. Our objective was to ascertain the correlation between the SVI and residency interviewer assessments of PROF and ICS. Secondary objectives included examination of 1) inter‐ and intrainstitutional assessments of ICS and PROF, 2) correlation of SVI scores with rank order list (ROL) positions, and 3) the potential influence of gender on interview day assessments.MethodsWe conducted an observational study using prospectively collected data from seven EM residency programs during 2017 and 2018 using a standardized instrument. Correlations between interview day PROF/ICS scores and the SVI were tested. A one‐way analysis of variance was used to analyze the association of SVI and ROL position. Gender differences were assessed with independent‐groups t‐tests.ResultsA total of 1,264 interview‐day encounters from 773 unique applicants resulted in 4,854 interviews conducted by 151 interviewers. Both PROF and ICS demonstrated a small positive correlation with the SVI score (r = 0.16 and r = 0.17, respectively). ROL position was associated with SVI score (p < 0.001), with mean SVI scores for top‐, middle‐, and bottom‐third applicants being 20.9, 20.5, and 19.8, respectively. No group differences with gender were identified on assessments of PROF or ICS.ConclusionsInterview assessments of PROF and ICS have a small, positive correlation with SVI scores. These residency selection tools may be measuring related, but not redundant, applicant characteristics. We did not identify gender differences in interview assessments.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150548/1/aet210346_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150548/2/aet210346.pd

The Vice Chair of Education in Emergency Medicine: A Workforce Study to Establish the Role, Clarify Responsibilities, and Plan for Success

ObjectivesDespite increasing prevalence in emergency medicine (EM), the vice chair of education (VCE) role remains ambiguous with regard to associated responsibilities and expectations. This study aimed to identify training experiences of current VCEs, clarify responsibilities, review career paths, and gather data to inform a unified job description.MethodsA 40‐item, anonymous survey was electronically sent to EM VCEs. VCEs were identified through EM chairs, residency program directors, and residency coordinators through solicitation e‐mails distributed through respective listservs. Quantitative data are reported as percentages with 95% confidence intervals and continuous variables as medians with interquartiles (IQRs). Open‐ and axial‐coding methods were used to organize qualitative data into thematic categories.ResultsForty‐seven of 59 VCEs completed the survey (79.6% response rate); 74.4% were male and 89.3% were white. Average time in the role was 3.56 years (median = 3.0 years, IQR = 4.0 years), with 74.5% serving as inaugural VCE. Many respondents held at least one additional administrative title. Most had no defined job description (68.9%) and reported no defined metrics of success (88.6%). Almost 78% received a reduction in clinical duties, with an average reduction of 27.7% protected time effort (median = 27.2%, IQR = 22.5%). Responsibilities thematically link to faculty affairs and promotion of the departmental educational mission and scholarship.ConclusionGiven the variability in expectations observed, the authors suggest the adoption of a unified VCE job description with detailed responsibilities and performance metrics to ensure success in the role. Efforts to improve the diversity of VCEs are encouraged to better match the diversity of learners.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154254/1/aet210407_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154254/2/aet210407.pd

Factors That Influence Medical Student Selection of an Emergency Medicine Residency Program: Implications for Training Programs

Objectives:  An understanding of student decision‐making when selecting an emergency medicine (EM) training program is essential for program directors as they enter interview season. To build upon preexisting knowledge, a survey was created to identify and prioritize the factors influencing candidate decision‐making of U.S. medical graduates. Methods:  This was a cross‐sectional, multi‐institutional study that anonymously surveyed U.S. allopathic applicants to EM training programs. It took place in the 3‐week period between the 2011 National Residency Matching Program (NRMP) rank list submission deadline and the announcement of match results. Results:  Of 1,525 invitations to participate, 870 candidates (57%) completed the survey. Overall, 96% of respondents stated that both geographic location and individual program characteristics were important to decision‐making, with approximately equal numbers favoring location when compared to those who favored program characteristics. The most important factors in this regard were preference for a particular geographic location (74.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 72% to 78%) and to be close to spouse, significant other, or family (59.7%, 95% CI = 56% to 63%). Factors pertaining to geographic location tend to be out of the control of the program leadership. The most important program factors include the interview experience (48.9%, 95% CI = 46% to 52%), personal experience with the residents (48.5%, 95% CI = 45% to 52%), and academic reputation (44.9%, 95% CI = 42% to 48%). Unlike location, individual program factors are often either directly or somewhat under the control of the program leadership. Several other factors were ranked as the most important factor a disproportionate number of times, including a rotation in that emergency department (ED), orientation (academic vs. community), and duration of training (3‐year vs. 4‐year programs). For a subset of applicants, these factors had particular importance in overall decision‐making. Conclusions:  The vast majority of applicants to EM residency programs employed a balance of geographic location factors with individual program factors in selecting a residency program. Specific program characteristics represent the greatest opportunity to maximize the success of the immediate interview experience/season, while others provide potential for strategic planning over time. A working knowledge of these results empowers program directors to make informed decisions while providing an appreciation for the limitations in attracting applicants.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/91198/1/ACEM_1323_sm_DataSupplementS1.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/91198/2/j.1553-2712.2012.01323.x.pd

Deciphering a Changing Match Environment in Emergency Medicine and Identifying Residency Program Needs

Introduction: The Match in emergency medicine (EM) is historically competitive for applicants; however, the 2022 residency Match had a large number of unfilled positions. We sought to characterize the impact of and response to the Match on programs and determine programs’ needs for successful recruitment strategies.Methods: We conducted a web-based survey of EM residency program leadership during March–April 2022. Program characteristics were generated from publicly available data, and descriptive statistics were generated. We analyzed free-text responses thematically.Results: There were 133/277 (48%) categorical EM residency programs that responded. Of those, 53.8% (70/130) reported a negative impression of their Match results; 17.7% (23/130) positive; and the remainder neutral (28.5%; 37/130). Three- and four-year programs did not differ in their risk of unfilled status. Hybrid programs had a higher likelihood of going unfilled (odds ratio [OR] 4.52, confidence interval [CI] 1.7- 12.04) vs community (OR 1.62, CI 0.68-3.86) or university programs (0.16, 0.0-0.49). Unfilled programs were geographically concentrated. The quality of applicants was perceived the same as previous years and did not differ between filled and unfilled programs. Respondents worried the expansion of EM residency positions and perceptions of the EM job market were major factors influencing the Match. They expressed interest in introducing changes to the interview process, including caps on applications and interviews, as well as a need for more structural support for programs and the specialty.Conclusion: This survey identifies impacts of the changed match environment on a broad range of programs and identifies specific needs. Future work should be directed toward a deeper understanding of the factors contributing to changes in the specialty and the development of evidence-based interventions.&nbsp

Programmatic Assessment of Level 1 Milestones in Incoming Interns

Objectives With the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Next Accreditation System, emergency medicine (EM) residency programs will be required to report residents' progress through the EM milestones. The milestones include five progressively advancing skill levels, with Level 1 defining the skill set of a medical school graduate and Level 5, that of an attending physician. The ACGME stresses that multiple forms of assessment should be used to ensure capture of the multifaceted competencies. The objective of this study was to determine the feasibility and results of programmatic assessment of Level 1 milestones using multisource assessments for incoming EM interns in July. Methods The study population was interns starting in 2012 and 2013. Interns' Level 1 milestone assessment was done with four distinct methods: 1) the postgraduate orientation assessment (POA) by the Graduate Medical Education Office for all incoming interns (this multistation examination covers nine of the EM milestones and includes standardized patient cases, task completion, and computer‐based stations); 2) direct observation of patient encounters by core faculty using a milestones‐based clinical skills competency checklist; 3) the global monthly assessment at the end of the intern orientation month that was updated to reflect the EM milestones; and 4) faculty assessment during procedural labs. These occurred during the July orientation month that included the POA, clinical shifts, didactic sessions, and procedure labs. Results In the POA, interns were competent in 48% to 93% of the milestones assessed. Overall, competency was 70% to 80%, with low scores noted in aseptic technique (patient care Milestone 13 [PC13]) and written and verbal hand‐off (interpersonal communications skills [ICS]2). In overall communication, 70% of interns demonstrated competency. In excess of 80% demonstrated competency in critical values interpretation (PC3), informed consent (PC9), pain assessment (PC11), and geriatric functional assessment (PC3). On direct observation, almost all Level 1 milestones were achieved (93% to 100%); however, only 78% of interns achieved competency in pharmacotherapy (PC5). On global monthly evaluations, all interns met Level 1 milestones. Conclusions A multisource assessment of EM milestones is feasible and useful to determine Level 1 milestones achievement for incoming interns. A structured assessment program, used in conjunction with more traditional forms of evaluation such as global monthly evaluations and direct observation, is useful for identifying deficits in new trainees and may be able inform the creation of early intervention programs. Resumen Objetivos Con el próximo sistema de acreditación (PSA) del Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education desde, se exigirá a los programas de residencia que documenten los progresos de los residentes a través de hitos. Los hitos incluyen cinco niveles de habilidad que aumentan progresivamente, con el nivel 1 que define el conjunto de habilidades de un licenciado en medicina, hasta el nivel 5 de un médico asistencial. La ACGME subraya que deberían ser utilizadas múltiples formas de evaluación para asegurar la captura de las competencias polifacéticas. El objetivo de este estudio fue determinar la viabilidad y los resultados de la evaluación programática de los hitos de nivel 1 usando evaluaciones de múltiples fuentes para los residentes entrantes de Medicina de Urgencias y Emergencias (MUE) en julio. Metodología La población de estudio fueron residentes que comenzaron en 2012 y 2013. La evaluación de los hitos de nivel 1 de los residentes se llevó a cabo con cuatro métodos distintos: 1) la evaluación de orientación posgrado (EOP) por la oficina Graduate Medical Education para todos los residentes entrantes. Este examen multiestación abarca nueve de los hitos de la MUE e incluye casos clínicos de pacientes estandarizados, realización de tareas y estaciones basadas en informática; 2) la observación directa de los encuentros con los pacientes por núcleo de profesores utilizando una lista de comprobación de competencia de habilidades clínicas basadas en hitos; 3) la evaluación mensual global al final del mes de orientación del residente que se actualiza para reflejar los hitos de la MUE; y 4) la evaluación del profesorado en los laboratorios de procedimientos. Éstos ocurrieron durante el mes de orientación de julio e incluyeron la EOP, las guardias, las sesiones clínicas y los laboratorios de procedimiento. Resultados En la EOP, los residentes fueron competentes en un 48–93% de los hitos evaluados. La competencia global fue de un 70% a un 80%, con puntuaciones bajas observadas en técnicas asépticas (PC13) así como las transferencias verbal y escrita (ICS2). En la comunicación total, un 70% de los residentes demostraron competencia. Se demostró más de un 80% de competencia en interpretación de valores críticos (PC3), consentimiento informado (PC9), valoración del dolor (PC11) y valoración funcional geriátrica (PC3). En la observación directa, se lograron casi todos los hitos de nivel 1 (93% a 100%), sin embargo sólo el 78% de los residentes adquirieron la competencia en farmacoterapia (PC5). En las evaluaciones mensuales globales, todos los residentes alcanzaron los hitos de nivel 1. Conclusiones Una evaluación multifuente de los hitos de la MUE es viable y útil para determinar los hitos de nivel 1 para residentes entrantes. Un programa de evaluación estructurado, usado en conjunción con las formas más tradicionales de evaluación como las evaluaciones mensuales globales y la observación directa, es útil para identificar los déficits en los nuevos residentes y puede ser capaz de informar para la creación de programas de intervención temprana.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/108037/1/acem12393-sup-0001-DataSupplementS1.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/108037/2/acem12393.pd