Fellowships in international emergency medicine in the USA: A comparative survey of program directors' and fellows' perspectives on the curriculum

Gabrielle A. Jacquet, Alexander Vu, William B. Ewen, Bhakti Hansoti, Steven Andescavage, David Price, Robert E Suter, Jamil D. Bayram

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective Experts have proposed core curriculum components for international emergency medicine (IEM) fellowships. This study examined perceptions of program directors (PDs) and fellows on whether IEM fellowships cover these components, whether their perspectives differ and the barriers preventing fellowships from covering them. Methods From 1 November 2011 to 30 November 2011, a survey was administered to PDs, current fellows and recent graduates of the 34 US IEM fellowships. Respondents quantified their fellowship experience in six proposed core curriculum areas: emergency medicine (EM) systems development, EM education, humanitarian assistance, public health, emergency medical services and disaster medicine. Analysis was performed regarding what per cent of programmes fulfil the six curriculum areas. A paired t test determined the difference between PDs' and fellows' responses. Agreement between PDs and fellows within the same programme was determined using a κ statistic. Results Only 1/18 (6%) (according to fellows) to 2/24 (8%) (according to PDs) of programmes expose fellows to all six components. PDs consistently reported higher exposure than fellows. The difference in mean score between PDs and fellows was statistically significant (p<0.05) in three of the 6 (50%) core curriculum elements: humanitarian aid, public health and disaster medicine. Per cent agreement between PDs and fellows within each programmes ranged from poor to fair. Conclusions While IEM fellowships have varying structure, this study highlights the importance of further discussion between PDs and fellows regarding delineation and objectives of core curriculum components. Transparent curricula and open communication between PDs and fellows may reduce differences in reported experiences.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3-7
Number of pages5
JournalPostgraduate Medical Journal
Volume90
Issue number1059
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Emergency Medicine
Curriculum
Disaster Medicine
Relief Work
Public Health
Emergency Medical Services
Surveys and Questionnaires
Communication
Education

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Fellowships in international emergency medicine in the USA : A comparative survey of program directors' and fellows' perspectives on the curriculum. / Jacquet, Gabrielle A.; Vu, Alexander; Ewen, William B.; Hansoti, Bhakti; Andescavage, Steven; Price, David; Suter, Robert E; Bayram, Jamil D.

In: Postgraduate Medical Journal, Vol. 90, No. 1059, 01.01.2014, p. 3-7.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Jacquet, Gabrielle A. ; Vu, Alexander ; Ewen, William B. ; Hansoti, Bhakti ; Andescavage, Steven ; Price, David ; Suter, Robert E ; Bayram, Jamil D. / Fellowships in international emergency medicine in the USA : A comparative survey of program directors' and fellows' perspectives on the curriculum. In: Postgraduate Medical Journal. 2014 ; Vol. 90, No. 1059. pp. 3-7.
@article{1d66daf532b546038ea450a4ba772357,
title = "Fellowships in international emergency medicine in the USA: A comparative survey of program directors' and fellows' perspectives on the curriculum",
abstract = "Objective Experts have proposed core curriculum components for international emergency medicine (IEM) fellowships. This study examined perceptions of program directors (PDs) and fellows on whether IEM fellowships cover these components, whether their perspectives differ and the barriers preventing fellowships from covering them. Methods From 1 November 2011 to 30 November 2011, a survey was administered to PDs, current fellows and recent graduates of the 34 US IEM fellowships. Respondents quantified their fellowship experience in six proposed core curriculum areas: emergency medicine (EM) systems development, EM education, humanitarian assistance, public health, emergency medical services and disaster medicine. Analysis was performed regarding what per cent of programmes fulfil the six curriculum areas. A paired t test determined the difference between PDs' and fellows' responses. Agreement between PDs and fellows within the same programme was determined using a κ statistic. Results Only 1/18 (6{\%}) (according to fellows) to 2/24 (8{\%}) (according to PDs) of programmes expose fellows to all six components. PDs consistently reported higher exposure than fellows. The difference in mean score between PDs and fellows was statistically significant (p<0.05) in three of the 6 (50{\%}) core curriculum elements: humanitarian aid, public health and disaster medicine. Per cent agreement between PDs and fellows within each programmes ranged from poor to fair. Conclusions While IEM fellowships have varying structure, this study highlights the importance of further discussion between PDs and fellows regarding delineation and objectives of core curriculum components. Transparent curricula and open communication between PDs and fellows may reduce differences in reported experiences.",
author = "Jacquet, {Gabrielle A.} and Alexander Vu and Ewen, {William B.} and Bhakti Hansoti and Steven Andescavage and David Price and Suter, {Robert E} and Bayram, {Jamil D.}",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1136/postgradmedj-2012-131714",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "90",
pages = "3--7",
journal = "Postgraduate Medical Journal",
issn = "0032-5473",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "1059",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Fellowships in international emergency medicine in the USA

T2 - A comparative survey of program directors' and fellows' perspectives on the curriculum

AU - Jacquet, Gabrielle A.

AU - Vu, Alexander

AU - Ewen, William B.

AU - Hansoti, Bhakti

AU - Andescavage, Steven

AU - Price, David

AU - Suter, Robert E

AU - Bayram, Jamil D.

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - Objective Experts have proposed core curriculum components for international emergency medicine (IEM) fellowships. This study examined perceptions of program directors (PDs) and fellows on whether IEM fellowships cover these components, whether their perspectives differ and the barriers preventing fellowships from covering them. Methods From 1 November 2011 to 30 November 2011, a survey was administered to PDs, current fellows and recent graduates of the 34 US IEM fellowships. Respondents quantified their fellowship experience in six proposed core curriculum areas: emergency medicine (EM) systems development, EM education, humanitarian assistance, public health, emergency medical services and disaster medicine. Analysis was performed regarding what per cent of programmes fulfil the six curriculum areas. A paired t test determined the difference between PDs' and fellows' responses. Agreement between PDs and fellows within the same programme was determined using a κ statistic. Results Only 1/18 (6%) (according to fellows) to 2/24 (8%) (according to PDs) of programmes expose fellows to all six components. PDs consistently reported higher exposure than fellows. The difference in mean score between PDs and fellows was statistically significant (p<0.05) in three of the 6 (50%) core curriculum elements: humanitarian aid, public health and disaster medicine. Per cent agreement between PDs and fellows within each programmes ranged from poor to fair. Conclusions While IEM fellowships have varying structure, this study highlights the importance of further discussion between PDs and fellows regarding delineation and objectives of core curriculum components. Transparent curricula and open communication between PDs and fellows may reduce differences in reported experiences.

AB - Objective Experts have proposed core curriculum components for international emergency medicine (IEM) fellowships. This study examined perceptions of program directors (PDs) and fellows on whether IEM fellowships cover these components, whether their perspectives differ and the barriers preventing fellowships from covering them. Methods From 1 November 2011 to 30 November 2011, a survey was administered to PDs, current fellows and recent graduates of the 34 US IEM fellowships. Respondents quantified their fellowship experience in six proposed core curriculum areas: emergency medicine (EM) systems development, EM education, humanitarian assistance, public health, emergency medical services and disaster medicine. Analysis was performed regarding what per cent of programmes fulfil the six curriculum areas. A paired t test determined the difference between PDs' and fellows' responses. Agreement between PDs and fellows within the same programme was determined using a κ statistic. Results Only 1/18 (6%) (according to fellows) to 2/24 (8%) (according to PDs) of programmes expose fellows to all six components. PDs consistently reported higher exposure than fellows. The difference in mean score between PDs and fellows was statistically significant (p<0.05) in three of the 6 (50%) core curriculum elements: humanitarian aid, public health and disaster medicine. Per cent agreement between PDs and fellows within each programmes ranged from poor to fair. Conclusions While IEM fellowships have varying structure, this study highlights the importance of further discussion between PDs and fellows regarding delineation and objectives of core curriculum components. Transparent curricula and open communication between PDs and fellows may reduce differences in reported experiences.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84890236856&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84890236856&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/postgradmedj-2012-131714

DO - 10.1136/postgradmedj-2012-131714

M3 - Article

C2 - 23964131

AN - SCOPUS:84890236856

VL - 90

SP - 3

EP - 7

JO - Postgraduate Medical Journal

JF - Postgraduate Medical Journal

SN - 0032-5473

IS - 1059

ER -