BackgroundA gender gap in faculty rank at academic institutions exists; however, data among graduate medical education (GME) programmes are limited. There is a need to assess gender disparities in GME leadership, as a lack of female leadership may affect recruitment, role modelling and mentorship of female trainees. This cross-sectional study aimed to describe the current state of gender in programme leadership (department chair, programme director (PD), associate/assistant PD (APD) and clerkship director (CD)) at accredited Emergency Medicine (EM) programmes in the USA to determine whether a gender gap exists.MethodsA survey was distributed to EM residency programmes in the USA assessing demographics and gender distribution among programme leadership. If no response was received, information was collected via the programme’s website. Data were organised by position, region and length of the programme. We obtained data on the number of female EM physicians in practice and in training/fellowship in 2017 from the Association of American Medical Colleges. Data analysis was completed using descriptive statistics and χ2 analysis.ResultsOf the 226 programmes contacted, 148 responded to the survey (66.3%). Among US EM residency programmes, 11.2% of chairs, 34.6% of PDs, 40.5% of APDs and 46.5% of CDs are women. The percentage of female chairs is significantly lower than the percentage of women in practice or in training in EM. The percentage of female PDs did not differ from the percentage of women in practice or in training in EM. The percentage of female APDs and CDs was significantly higher than the percentage of women in practice but did not differ from the percentage in training. There was wide variability across regions. Four-year programmes had more women in PD and APD positions compared with 3-year programmes (p=0.01).ConclusionsWhile the representation of women in educational roles is encouraging, the number of women holding the rank of chairperson remains disproportionately low. Further studies are needed to evaluate reasons for this and strategies to increase gender equality in leadership roles.
ObjectivesTo address the increasing demand for the use of simulation for assessment, our objective was to review the literature pertaining to simulation-based assessment and develop a set of consensus-based expert-informed recommendations on the use of simulation-based assessment as presented at the 2019 Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) Academic Symposium on Education.MethodsA panel of Emergency Medicine (EM) physicians from across Canada, with leadership roles in simulation and/or assessment, was formed to develop the recommendations. An initial scoping literature review was conducted to extract principles of simulation-based assessment. These principles were refined via thematic analysis, and then used to derive a set of recommendations for the use of simulation-based assessment, organized by the Consensus Framework for Good Assessment. This was reviewed and revised via a national stakeholder survey, and then the recommendations were presented and revised at the consensus conference to generate a final set of recommendations on the use of simulation-based assessment in EM.ConclusionWe developed a set of recommendations for simulation-based assessment, using consensus-based expert-informed methods, across the domains of validity, reproducibility, feasibility, educational and catalytic effects, acceptability, and programmatic assessment. While the precise role of simulation-based assessment will be a subject of continued debate, we propose that these recommendations be used to assist educators and program leaders as they incorporate simulation-based assessment into their programs of assessment.
Introduction / Innovation Concept: Insertion of an internal jugular (IJ) central venous catheter (CVC) under ultrasound guidance (USG) is a complex skill that requires considerable practice in order to achieve technical proficiency. Simulation allows novices to engage in structured and high volume repetitive practice of USG IJ CVC insertion and to work through a predictable pattern of errors prior to real patient encounters. Based on earlier work on learning curves for CVC insertion, this curriculum uses a model of simulation-based high volume deliberate practice of the fundamental skills of USG CVC insertion, and was designed with careful consideration of the conditions associated with optimal learning and improvement of performance. Methods: Eight residents (post graduate year 2) from the Departments of Emergency Medicine and Anesthesiology engaged in deliberate practice of USG CVC insertion during three two-hour sessions, at 2-week intervals. Progress of the residents was monitored with direct observation and regular hand motion analysis (HMA), which was compared to performance metrics set by a local expert. Curriculum, Tool, or Material: Students reviewed online introductory ultrasound video and articles outlining internal jugular (IJ) and femoral CVC insertion prior to the first session. Session 1 focused on ultrasound skills including knobology, transducer movement, and needle tracking. This was followed by 60 minutes of deliberate practice of the skills of USG CVC insertion on both femoral and IJ models. During sessions 2/3, students practiced complete gowning and draping using sterile technique. This was followed again by deliberate practice of the skills of USG CVC insertion on both femoral and IJ models. Students received coaching and feedback throughout all sessions, with HMA assessment of USG IJ CVC insertion at the beginning and end of each session. After three training sessions, consisting of 85 total attempts, 5/8 residents surpassed the expert benchmark for probe hand motion, 6/8 for needle hand motion, and 1/8 for total procedure time, with the remaining residents approaching the expert benchmark for each metric. Conclusion: We have successfully developed a simulation-based curriculum for USG IJ CVC placement. Residents demonstrated continuous improvement in each session, approaching or exceeding the expert benchmarks by the end of the third session.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.