Single-Center Longitudinal Implementation of Lecture Series Based on the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria for Emergency Medicine Provider Education

Makary, Mina S.; Ende, Elizabeth Von; Farrell, Jeffrey; Kosmas, Christos

doi:10.1067/j.cpradiol.2019.10.005

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While many curricula have focused on knowledge and skills with respect to interpretation, it may also be important to include other facets related to radiology, such as appropriateness of obtaining studies, associated risks, and cost/benefit assessments. 20,21,22 We are hopeful that our results help inform the development of future radiology curricula for EM residents.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Radiology Education Among Emergency Medicine Residencies: A National Needs Assessment

Villa

Wheaton

Lai

et al. 2021

WestJEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Radiology training is an important component of emergency medicine (EM) education, but its delivery has been variable. Program directors have reported a lack of radiology skills in incoming interns. A needs assessment is a crucial first step toward improving radiology education among EM residencies. Our objective was to explore the current state of radiology education in EM residency programs. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey study of all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited EM programs in the United States. Program leadership completed an online survey consisting of multiple choice, Likert scale, and free-response items. We calculated and reported descriptive statistics. Results: Of eligible EM programs, 142/252 (56%) completed the survey including 105 postgraduate year (PGY) 1-3 and 36 PGY 1-4 programs. One respondent opted out of answering demographic questions. 23/141 (16%) were from the Western region, 29/141 (21%) were from the North Central region, 14/141 (10%) were from the South-Central region, 28/141 (20%) were from the Southeast region, and 47/141 (33%) were from the Northeast region. A total of 88/142 (62%) of responding programs did not have formal radiology instruction. Of the education that is provided, 127/142 (89%) provide it via didactics/lectures and 115/142 (81%) rely on instruction during clinical shifts. Only 51/142 (36%) provide asynchronous opportunities, and 23/142 (16%) have a dedicated radiology rotation. The majority of respondents reported spending 0-2 hours per month on radiology instruction (108/142; 76%); 95/141 (67%) reported that EM faculty “often” or “always” provide radiology instruction; 134/142 (95%), felt that it was “extremely” or “very important” for ED providers to be able to independently interpret radiograph results; and 129/142 (90.84%) either “sometimes” or “always” rely on their independent radiograph interpretations to make clinical decisions. The radiology studies identified as most important to be able to independently interpret were radiographs obtained for lines/tubes, chest radiographs, and radiographs obtained for musculoskeletal-related complaints. Conclusion: A minority of EM residency programs have formal instruction in radiology despite the majority of responding program leadership believing that these are important skills. The most important curricular areas were identified. These results may inform the development of formal radiology curricula in EM graduate medical education.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%