Resident Clinical Experience in the Emergency Department: Patient Encounters by Postgraduate Year.
Journal
AEM education and training
ISSN: 2472-5390
Titre abrégé: AEM Educ Train
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101722142
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2019
Jul 2019
Historique:
received:
27
10
2018
revised:
03
01
2019
accepted:
08
01
2019
entrez:
31
7
2019
pubmed:
31
7
2019
medline:
31
7
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
During emergency medicine (EM) training, residents are exposed to a wide spectrum of patient complaints. We sought to determine how resident clinical experience changes based on training level in relation to the patient acuity levels, chief complaints, and dispositions. We performed a retrospective chart review of patients seen at a safety-net, academic hospital in Los Angeles from July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016. Resident postgraduate year (PGY) level and specialty, patient acuity (based on the Emergency Severity Index), chief complaint (based on one of 30 categories), and disposition were abstracted. Our primary objective was to examine the progression of EM resident experience throughout the course of training. As a secondary objective, we compared the cases seen by EM and off-service PGY-1s. A total of 49,535 visits were examined, and of these, 32,870 (66.4%) were in the adult ED (AED) and 16,665 (33.6%) were in the pediatric ED (PED). The median acuity level was 3, and 27.4% of AED patients and 7.3% of PED patients were admitted. Data from 126 residents were analyzed. This included 94 PGY-1 residents (16 EM and 78 off-service), 16 PGY-2 EM, and 16 PGY-3 EM residents. Residents of different training levels evaluated different types of patients. Senior EM residents were more likely to care for higher-acuity patients than junior EM residents. EM PGY-3s saw higher percentages of acuity level 1 and 2 patients (2.3 and 37.8%, respectively, of their total patients) than EM PGY-1s (0.3 and 18.7%, respectively). Conversely, EM PGY-1s saw higher percentages of acuity level 4 and 5 patients (27.9 and 1.6%, respectively) compared to EM PGY-3s (10.7 and 0.7%, respectively). There was a significant linear trend for increasing acuity with training year among EM residents (p < 0.001). EM PGY-1s saw more patients than off-service PGY-1s with slightly higher acuities and admission rates. The clinical experience of EM residents varies based on their level of training. EM residents show a progression throughout residency and are more likely to encounter higher volumes of patients with higher acuity as they progress in their training. When designing EM residency curriculums, this is a model of an EM residency program.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
During emergency medicine (EM) training, residents are exposed to a wide spectrum of patient complaints. We sought to determine how resident clinical experience changes based on training level in relation to the patient acuity levels, chief complaints, and dispositions.
METHODS
METHODS
We performed a retrospective chart review of patients seen at a safety-net, academic hospital in Los Angeles from July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016. Resident postgraduate year (PGY) level and specialty, patient acuity (based on the Emergency Severity Index), chief complaint (based on one of 30 categories), and disposition were abstracted. Our primary objective was to examine the progression of EM resident experience throughout the course of training. As a secondary objective, we compared the cases seen by EM and off-service PGY-1s.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 49,535 visits were examined, and of these, 32,870 (66.4%) were in the adult ED (AED) and 16,665 (33.6%) were in the pediatric ED (PED). The median acuity level was 3, and 27.4% of AED patients and 7.3% of PED patients were admitted. Data from 126 residents were analyzed. This included 94 PGY-1 residents (16 EM and 78 off-service), 16 PGY-2 EM, and 16 PGY-3 EM residents. Residents of different training levels evaluated different types of patients. Senior EM residents were more likely to care for higher-acuity patients than junior EM residents. EM PGY-3s saw higher percentages of acuity level 1 and 2 patients (2.3 and 37.8%, respectively, of their total patients) than EM PGY-1s (0.3 and 18.7%, respectively). Conversely, EM PGY-1s saw higher percentages of acuity level 4 and 5 patients (27.9 and 1.6%, respectively) compared to EM PGY-3s (10.7 and 0.7%, respectively). There was a significant linear trend for increasing acuity with training year among EM residents (p < 0.001). EM PGY-1s saw more patients than off-service PGY-1s with slightly higher acuities and admission rates.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The clinical experience of EM residents varies based on their level of training. EM residents show a progression throughout residency and are more likely to encounter higher volumes of patients with higher acuity as they progress in their training. When designing EM residency curriculums, this is a model of an EM residency program.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31360817
doi: 10.1002/aet2.10326
pii: AET210326
pmc: PMC6637008
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
243-250Références
J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2003 Jun;103(6):291-6
pubmed: 12834102
AEM Educ Train. 2019 Feb 27;3(3):243-250
pubmed: 31360817
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2012 Nov 24;20:76
pubmed: 23176447
Acad Emerg Med. 2007 Sep;14(9):790-4
pubmed: 17726123
Ann Emerg Med. 1990 Jul;19(7):764-73
pubmed: 2389860
Rural Remote Health. 2015 Oct-Dec;15(4):3298
pubmed: 26461165
J Emerg Med. 2013 Sep;45(3):414-8
pubmed: 23849363
Rural Remote Health. 2010 Apr-Jun;10(2):1442
pubmed: 20509723
Acad Emerg Med. 2000 Mar;7(3):236-42
pubmed: 10730830
Acad Emerg Med. 1999 Jul;6(7):728-35
pubmed: 10433534
Acad Emerg Med. 2001 Jan;8(1):61-4
pubmed: 11136151
Acad Emerg Med. 2001 Feb;8(2):170-6
pubmed: 11157294
Acad Emerg Med. 2000 Jan;7(1):90-2
pubmed: 10894249
Pediatr Emerg Care. 1998 Oct;14(5):332-3
pubmed: 9814398
Am J Emerg Med. 2008 Sep;26(7):789-91
pubmed: 18774044