Benchmark Performance of Emergency Medicine Residents in Pediatric Resuscitation: Are We Optimizing Pediatric Education for Emergency Medicine Trainees?
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:
Apr 2021
Apr 2021
Historique:
received:
20
03
2020
revised:
03
07
2020
accepted:
13
07
2020
entrez:
26
4
2021
pubmed:
27
4
2021
medline:
27
4
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The majority of children in the United States seek emergency care at community-based general emergency departments (GEDs); however, the quality of GED pediatric emergency care varies widely. This may be explained by a number of factors, including residency training environments and postgraduate knowledge decay. Emergency medicine (EM) residents train in academic pediatric EDs, but didactic and clinical experience vary widely between programs, and little is known about the pediatric skills of these EM residents. This study aimed to assess the performance of senior EM residents in treating simulated pediatric patients at the end of their training. This was a prospective, cross-sectional, simulation-based cohort study assessing the simulated performance of senior EM resident physicians from two Massachusetts programs leading medical teams caring for three critically ill patients. Sessions were video recorded and scored separately by three reviewers using a previously published simulation assessment tool. Self-efficacy surveys were completed prior to each session. The primary outcome was a median total performance score (TPS), calculated by the mean of individualized domain scores (IDS) for each case. Each IDS was calculated as a percentage of items performed on a checklist-based instrument. A total of 18 EM resident physicians participated (PGY-3 = 8, PGY-4 = 10). Median TPS for the cohort was 61% (IQR = 56%-70%). Median IDSs by case were as follows: sepsis 67% (IQR = 50%-67%), seizure 67% (IQR = 50%-83%), and cardiac arrest 67% (IQR = 43%-70%). The overall cohort self-efficacy for pediatric EM (PEM) was 64% (IQR = 60%-70%). This study has begun the process of benchmarking clinical performance of graduating EM resident physicians. Overall, the EM resident cohort in this study performed similar to prior GED teams. Self-efficacy related to PEM correlated well with performance, with the exception of knowledge relative to intravenous fluid and vasopressor administration in pediatric septic shock. A significant area of discrepancy and missed checklist items were those related to cardiopulmonary resuscitation and basic life support maneuvers.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The majority of children in the United States seek emergency care at community-based general emergency departments (GEDs); however, the quality of GED pediatric emergency care varies widely. This may be explained by a number of factors, including residency training environments and postgraduate knowledge decay. Emergency medicine (EM) residents train in academic pediatric EDs, but didactic and clinical experience vary widely between programs, and little is known about the pediatric skills of these EM residents. This study aimed to assess the performance of senior EM residents in treating simulated pediatric patients at the end of their training.
METHODS
METHODS
This was a prospective, cross-sectional, simulation-based cohort study assessing the simulated performance of senior EM resident physicians from two Massachusetts programs leading medical teams caring for three critically ill patients. Sessions were video recorded and scored separately by three reviewers using a previously published simulation assessment tool. Self-efficacy surveys were completed prior to each session. The primary outcome was a median total performance score (TPS), calculated by the mean of individualized domain scores (IDS) for each case. Each IDS was calculated as a percentage of items performed on a checklist-based instrument.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 18 EM resident physicians participated (PGY-3 = 8, PGY-4 = 10). Median TPS for the cohort was 61% (IQR = 56%-70%). Median IDSs by case were as follows: sepsis 67% (IQR = 50%-67%), seizure 67% (IQR = 50%-83%), and cardiac arrest 67% (IQR = 43%-70%). The overall cohort self-efficacy for pediatric EM (PEM) was 64% (IQR = 60%-70%).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This study has begun the process of benchmarking clinical performance of graduating EM resident physicians. Overall, the EM resident cohort in this study performed similar to prior GED teams. Self-efficacy related to PEM correlated well with performance, with the exception of knowledge relative to intravenous fluid and vasopressor administration in pediatric septic shock. A significant area of discrepancy and missed checklist items were those related to cardiopulmonary resuscitation and basic life support maneuvers.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33898912
doi: 10.1002/aet2.10509
pii: AET210509
pmc: PMC8052997
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e10509Subventions
Organisme : AHRQ HHS
ID : R18 HS020286
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2020 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.
Références
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2000 Apr;16(2):73-6
pubmed: 10784204
J Pediatr. 2017 Jul;186:145-149.e1
pubmed: 28396022
Resuscitation. 2013 Mar;84(3):292-7
pubmed: 23103887
Resuscitation. 2007 Jun;73(3):430-6
pubmed: 17291672
Acad Emerg Med. 2012 May;19(5):577-85
pubmed: 22594362
Acad Emerg Med. 2000 Jul;7(7):774-8
pubmed: 10917327
Acad Emerg Med. 2010 Oct;17 Suppl 2:S104-13
pubmed: 21199076
Am J Emerg Med. 2013 May;31(5):886.e3-5
pubmed: 23602753
JAMA Pediatr. 2015 Jun;169(6):527-34
pubmed: 25867088
Curr Opin Pediatr. 2006 Jun;18(3):266-71
pubmed: 16721146
Acad Emerg Med. 2018 Feb;25(2):177-185
pubmed: 28977717
J Pediatr Surg. 2006 Nov;41(11):1793-8
pubmed: 17101346
Pediatr Emerg Care. 1993 Jun;9(3):143-5
pubmed: 8346085
J Emerg Med. 2017 Jun;52(6):846-849
pubmed: 28351510
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2020 May;21(5):e213-e220
pubmed: 32132503
J Emerg Med. 2004 May;26(4):465-9
pubmed: 15093862
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2014 Dec;30(12):879-83
pubmed: 25407033
Ann Emerg Med. 1997 Jun;29(6):792-811
pubmed: 9174528
CJEM. 2013 Jul;15(4):241-8
pubmed: 23777999
Acad Emerg Med. 2012 Dec;19(12):1476-80
pubmed: 23230958
J Emerg Med. 2018 Sep;55(3):423-434
pubmed: 29793812
Acad Med. 2009 Jul;84(7):935-41
pubmed: 19550192
AEM Educ Train. 2020 Mar 25;5(1):5-11
pubmed: 33521485
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2007 Nov;23(11):774-8
pubmed: 18007206
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2016 Sep;17(9):817-22
pubmed: 27455114
Acad Emerg Med. 2012 Jan;19(1):37-47
pubmed: 22251191
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2019 Jun;35(6):412-418
pubmed: 27763955
Pediatrics. 2001 Apr;107(4):777-81
pubmed: 11335759
J Emerg Med. 2017 Oct;53(4):467-474.e7
pubmed: 28843460
Acad Med. 2015 Aug;90(8):1034-42
pubmed: 25806621
Natl Health Stat Report. 2008 Aug 6;(7):1-38
pubmed: 18958996
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2017 Apr;33(4):278-286
pubmed: 28355170
Pediatrics. 2019 Sep;144(3):
pubmed: 31444254
Pediatrics. 2009 Aug;124(2):500-8
pubmed: 19651576
Acad Emerg Med. 2004 Jul;11(7):771-3
pubmed: 15231469
JAMA Pediatr. 2016 Oct 1;170(10):987-994
pubmed: 27570926
Ann Emerg Med. 2016 Mar;67(3):320-328.e1
pubmed: 26320519
Acad Emerg Med. 2014 Jul;21(7):778-84
pubmed: 25039935
Acad Emerg Med. 2000 Jul;7(7):797-9
pubmed: 10917331
Acad Emerg Med. 2008 Nov;15(11):1199-206
pubmed: 18638032
J Pediatr. 2015 Dec;167(6):1301-5.e1
pubmed: 26411864
Ann Emerg Med. 2006 Dec;48(6):694-701
pubmed: 17067721
Pediatrics. 2009 Oct;124(4):1233-43
pubmed: 19770172