Search

Objective: A panel of Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) members was asked to examine and make recommendations regarding the existing Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) EM Program Requirements pertaining to educational conferences, identified best practices, and recommended revisions as appropriate. Methods: Using quasi-Delphi technique, 30 emergency medicine (EM) residency program directors and faculty examined existing requirements. Findings were presented to the CORD members attending the 2008 CORD Academic Assembly, and disseminated to the broader membership through the CORD e-mail list server. Results: The following four ACGME EM Program Requirements were examined, and recommendations made: 1 The 5 hours/week conference requirement: For fully accredited programs in good standing, outcomes should be driving how programs allocate and mandate educational time. Maintain the 5 hours/week conference requirement for new programs, programs with provisional accreditation, programs in difficult political environs, and those with short accreditation cycles. If the program requirements must retain a minimum hours/week reference, future requirements should take into account varying program lengths (3 versus 4 years). 2 The 70% attendance requirement: Develop a new requirement that allows programs more flexibility to customize according to local resources, individual residency needs, and individual resident needs. 3 The requirement for synchronous versus asynchronous learning: Synchronous and asynchronous learning activities have advantages and disadvantages. The ideal curriculum capitalizes on the strengths of each through a deliberate mixture of each. 4 Educationally justified innovations: Transition from process-based program requirements to outcomes-based requirements. Conclusions: The conference requirements that were logical and helpful years ago may not be logical or helpful now. Technologies available to educators have changed, the amount of material to cover has grown, and online on-demand education has grown even more. We believe that flexibility is needed to customize EM education to suit individual resident and individual program needs, to capitalize on regional and national resources when local resources are limited, to innovate, and to analyze and evaluate interventions with an eye toward outcomes.

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.

Objective: A panel of Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) members was asked to examine and make recommendations regarding the existing Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) EM Program Requirements pertaining to educational conferences, identified best practices, and recommended revisions as appropriate.Using quasi-Delphi technique, 30 emergency medicine (EM) residency program directors and faculty examined existing requirements. Findings were presented to the CORD members attending the 2008 CORD Academic Assembly, and disseminated to the broader membership through the CORD e-mail list server.The following four ACGME EM Program Requirements were examined, and recommendations made: 1. The 5 hours/week conference requirement: For fully accredited programs in good standing, outcomes should be driving how programs allocate and mandate educational time. Maintain the 5 hours/week conference requirement for new programs, programs with provisional accreditation, programs in difficult political environs, and those with short accreditation cycles. If the program requirements must retain a minimum hours/week reference, future requirements should take into account varying program lengths (3 versus 4 years). 2. The 70% attendance requirement: Develop a new requirement that allows programs more flexibility to customize according to local resources, individual residency needs, and individual resident needs. 3. The requirement for synchronous versus asynchronous learning: Synchronous and asynchronous learning activities have advantages and disadvantages. The ideal curriculum capitalizes on the strengths of each through a deliberate mixture of each. 4. Educationally justified innovations: Transition from process-based program requirements to outcomes-based requirements.The conference requirements that were logical and helpful years ago may not be logical or helpful now. Technologies available to educators have changed, the amount of material to cover has grown, and online on-demand education has grown even more. We believe that flexibility is needed to customize EM education to suit individual resident and individual program needs, to capitalize on regional and national resources when local resources are limited, to innovate, and to analyze and evaluate interventions with an eye toward outcomes.

Objective Chart review studies have suggested that point-of-care urine dipstick testing may accurately predict an elevation in serum creatinine (Cr). We aimed to prospectively evaluate the test characteristics of proteinuria/hematuria in predicting elevated serum Cr. Methods A prospective, observational study was conducted between March 2007 and June 2008 at 2 affiliated, urban hospitals with an annual emergency department census of 150 000. Patients undergoing laboratory urinalysis, point-of-care urine dipstick, and a serum chemistry panel were enrolled. Trained research assistants collected data on consecutive patients 18 hours per day using preformatted data forms and entry into an anonymized Access (Microsoft, Seattle, Wash) database. Demographic baseline variables including age, sex, chief complaint, vital signs, and source of sample (catheter vs “clean catch”) were also collected. An elevated Cr level was defined as greater than 1.3 based on the laboratory reference range. Standard statistical methods were used to calculate diagnostic test operating characteristics of proteinuria or hematuria as a predictor of elevated serum Cr. Results Five thousand four hundred sixteen subjects were enrolled with 28.3% male and a mean age of 50.2 years. Elevated serum Cr greater than 1.3 mg/dL was found in 13.9% (755/5416) of subjects. The sensitivity of either proteinuria or hematuria for elevated Cr was 82.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80%-85%) and specificity was 34.4% (95% CI, 33%-36%). Positive predictive value was 16.9% (95% CI, 16%-18%) and negative predictive value was 92.4% (95% CI, 91-94%). The likelihood ratio for a positive test was 1.3 (95% CI, 1.1-1.5), and the likelihood ratio for a negative test was 0.5 (95% CI, 0.3-0.8). Conclusions Although negative predictive value was high, the presence of proteinuria/hematuria was only moderately predictive of elevated serum Cr level.