Do Emergency Medicine Residency Graduates Feel Prepared to Manage Closed Fractures After Training?

Variations in Trauma Education Practices Across Emergency Medicine Residencies: Insights from a National Survey of Program Directors

Purpose

Care of the acutely injured trauma patient is integral to the practice of emergency medicine. It is currently unknown how most emergency medicine residencies structure their residents' trauma experience and little guidance for competency assessment is provided by the Residency Review Committee. Our study aimed to determine current emergency medicine residency practices in trauma resuscitation.

Patients and Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of members of the Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine (CORD) listserv in April 2023. Frequency with percentage of item responses is reported and differences across trauma levels assessed via Fisher's exact test (α = 0.05).

Results

Fifty-seven program directors responded to the survey (21.9%), the majority of whom operate at Level I facilities. Significantly more Level II/ III centers send residents to other sites for trauma experience compared to Level I (p = 0.000). Residents participate in all key procedures (eg, airway management, central venous access) when managing traumas except thoracotomy where participation was notably lower and statistically different across levels (p = 0.000). Lastly, program directors were very confident their residents can lead traumas independently and few acknowledged citations for deficiency in trauma training.

Conclusion

Trauma training and confirmation of competency is critical among EM residents who may serve as the sole lead in rural emergency departments. This study demonstrates that there is considerable variability in how residency programs structure trauma education, particularly with regards to the exposure to invasive procedures and the opportunity to lead trauma resuscitations. As the American Board of Emergency Medicine has introduced requirements for program directors to attest specifically to the competence of residents to lead trauma resuscitations, standardized and validated tools should be adopted to support this attestation and ensure competence regardless of the program hospital's trauma level.

Development and National Validation of a Musculoskeletal Emergency Medicine Assessment Tool

Introduction Musculoskeletal (MSK) complaints and injuries are the fourth most common primary diagnosis in the emergency department in the United States (US). Despite the prevalence and economic impact on the US healthcare system, new emergency medicine (EM) residency graduates report feeling unprepared to treat MSK complaints. Currently, there are no reported means to assess MSK knowledge in EM resident physicians. The purpose of this study is to develop a validated and peer-reviewed multiple-choice assessment tool focused on MSK knowledge relevant to EM to allow us to better assess the knowledge of resident physicians. Methods A group of EM/Sports Medicine subject-matter experts (SMEs) created an initial list of the most important MSK topics in EM to generate a relevant question bank. The questions were validated by a different group of SMEs using a three-round modified Delphi method to obtain consensus on the importance of each question. Based on these results, the assessment was formed. Results From a list of 99 MSK topics, SMEs developed a final list of 37 MSK topics relevant to EM. Following round one, free-marginal kappa was 0.58, 95% CI [0.50, 0.66], with a moderate overall agreement of 71.95%. Following round two, the calculated free-marginal kappa increased to 0.88, 95% CI [0.83, 0.92], with an overall agreement of 91.79%. Using a five-point Likert scale, a threshold of an average score less than four was used to exclude questions in round three of validation and to create a final 50-question assessment tool. Conclusion Our proposed exam, titled Musculoskeletal Emergency Medicine Assessment Tool (MEAT), was successfully validated by experts in our field. It evaluates clinically important topics and offers a tool for assessing MSK knowledge in EM resident physicians. Future studies are needed to determine the feasibility of administering the tool and to establish a baseline score among different populations within the practicing field of EM.

A Profile of Orthopedic Education in Emergency Medicine Residency Programs in the United States

Introduction Emergency medicine (EM) residents throughout the United States are required to become skilled at performing a robust list of select orthopedic procedures, as well as learn how to diagnose and manage patients with musculoskeletal complaints. However, EM residency programs vary significantly in how they teach orthopedics and the content they cover. The purpose of this study was to profile the orthopedic education received by emergency medicine residents in United States residency programs. Methods We developed a survey based on accreditation requirements and The Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine. The survey was designed to gather detailed information about the orthopedic education provided to EM residents. The survey was sent to EM program directors or their designees at all 263 accredited EM residency programs across the United States between October 2020 to January 2021. Results We attained a 34.6% (91 of 260) adjusted response rate with adequate representation of relevant program characteristics such as region, accreditation status, program length, size, and setting. Most (63.7%) responding programs required an orthopedics rotation during the intern year. These required orthopedic rotations were primarily four weeks in duration. The most common methods for teaching orthopedic topics included didactics (97.8%), procedures on live patients under supervision (73.3%), and assigned reading materials in textbooks or manuals (68.9%). Conclusion The orthopedic education received by EM residents in the United States is strikingly variable, with residency programs having to develop custom curricula to teach orthopedics content based on the resources available to them. Future efforts should be directed toward creating a universal curriculum that addresses accreditation and EM practice standards.

National Needs Assessment of Emergency Medicine Residencies for Musculoskeletal Knowledge

Introduction Musculoskeletal (MSK) complaints and injuries account for a large percentage of presenting chief complaints to the emergency department in the United States (US). Despite the prevalence and economic impact on the US healthcare system, there is a documented deficiency in MSK education at all training and practicing levels in the US medical system. The purpose of this needs assessment is to better determine the state of MSK education in Emergency Medicine residency programs. Methods An online needs assessment form was sent to Emergency Medicine program directors in the US. Summary statistics were performed followed by an exploratory analysis. Results Data from 43 of 272 Emergency Medicine program directors that responded to this needs assessment were analyzed. Respondents ranked the importance of MSK education in Emergency Medicine on a Likert scale of 1-5 (very unimportant to very important) at a mean of 4.2. Additionally, 97.6% of respondents believe that their MSK curriculum could be improved. Seventy-nine percent of respondents were somewhat likely or highly likely to use a standardized method or tool to assess MSK knowledge. Of the top three barriers to MSK education implementation, 94.9% cited time, 56.4% cited interdepartmental relations, and 46.2% cited funding. Conclusion MSK knowledge is taught and assessed in highly variable methods across Emergency Medicine residency programs. Although efforts are being made to address the known deficiency in MSK knowledge, further research is needed to perform a larger needs assessment, study innovative MSK education modalities, and develop a standardized MSK assessment for Emergency Medicine residency training.

Impact of Sports Medicine and Orthopedic Surgery Rotations on Musculoskeletal Knowledge in Residency: An Update and Longitudinal Study

Introduction Musculoskeletal (MSK) complaints and injuries account for a significant percentage of presenting chief complaints to the emergency department in the United States (US). Despite the prevalence of disease and economic impact on the US healthcare system, there is a documented deficiency in MSK education at all training and practicing levels in the US medical system. The purpose of this study is to determine MSK knowledge acquisition after an orthopedic or primary care sports medicine (PCSM) rotation in three emergency medicine (EM) residency programs at a single institution. Methods A total of 115 EM post-graduate year 1 (PGY-1) residents participated in and completed this study over five academic years. Based on existing residency program curricula, the participants were categorized into two groups. One group completed a traditional four-week Orthopedic Surgery rotation and the other group completed a four-week Sports Medicine rotation. The validated written Freedman and Bernstein MSK examination (FB-MSK) was administered to all participants at the start of residency and at completion of their rotation. Fifty-nine of the participants participated in a longitudinal secondary study over five academic years. The FB-MSK was offered to all participants every year following the completion of their rotation during their residency. Results Post-rotation scores improved regardless of which group the resident belonged to. The orthopedic group improved an average of 3.11 points (p = <0.0001, CI 2.39 to 3.82) and the average improvement in the PCSM group was 3.97 points (p = <0.0001, CI 2.81 to 5.83). The post-rotation scores were similar regardless of the group (p = 0.4287, CI -0.73 to 1.70). The amount of improvement in scores between the two groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.209, CI -0.49 to 2.21). Of the longitudinal participants, PGY-3+ significantly scored higher than PGY-1 (p = 0.0325, 95% CI 0.165 to 3.658). Conclusion Regardless of rotation type, MSK knowledge acquisition appears to significantly improve. EM senior residents demonstrate significant MSK knowledge acquisition during residency. Further studies on a multi-institutional level are needed to account for MSK curriculum variability in residency programs.

Presence of Orthopedic Residency Decreases Emergency Physician's Confidence in Orthopedic Procedures

Introduction: At present, there exists no standard orthopedic training for emergency medicine (EM) residency programs. Varying residency environments including but not limited to volume, acuity, and competing residency programs will dictate the number of orthopedic procedures a resident is exposed to, ultimately dictating a graduate’s comfort level with orthopedic procedures. Our study set out to investigate further whether training alongside an orthopedic residency affects an attending physician’s perceived procedural comfort.

Methods: This is a cohort study utilizing a 14-question survey distributed to an online community of EM physicians to examine the relationship between training at a residence program alongside orthopedic residents, the utility of an elective orthopedic rotation, and the overall confidence in managing closed reductions.

Results: EM physicians trained at a program that also hosted an orthopedic residency were more likely to train at large academic tertiary care centers (78%). Forty-two percent of these respondents felt that the presence of an orthopedic residency had a negative impact on their overall orthopedic training. The remaining 58% felt that the orthopedic residency had a positive impact on their procedural skills. In our study, the overall mean comfort level was statistically significant (p-value = 0.0024) higher in those who trained without orthopedic residents (8.78) compared to those who trained alongside an orthopedic residency (7.61). Those who had an elective orthopedic rotation found it to be more beneficial if they did the rotation with an orthopedic residency (p-value = 0.0329). Those who reported a beneficial orthopedic rotation also reported a higher level of confidence in the management of non-fracture reductions (p < 0.011, ρ = .25).

Conclusion: Seeing as though both training and practice environments for emergency physicians vary greatly across the country, every effort should be taken to ensure graduating residents are prepared to perform orthopedic procedures without the assistance of orthopedic surgeons. Irrespective of whether a program has in-house orthopedic residents or not, EM residents should take it upon themselves to maximize their time during residency to focus on these core competencies. Graduates at the greatest risk of having low confidence are trained at academic centers that also host orthopedic programs. One should be cognizant of this while going through their EM residency.

Impact of Sports Medicine and Orthopedic Surgery Rotations on Musculoskeletal Knowledge in Residency

Introduction

Musculoskeletal (MSK) complaints and injuries comprise 18.7% of emergency department visits. However, only 61% of emergency physicians (EP) pass a validated written Freedman and Bernstein MSK examination (FB-MSK). Educational interventions such as a primary care sports medicine (PCSM) rotation aid in MSK residency education. This study utilizes a validated MSK examination to evaluate and compare MSK knowledge acquisition following a traditional orthopedic rotation and a PCSM rotation.

Methods

Forty-nine interns were recruited to participate in this study over two academic years. The FB-MSK was administered to all participants at the start of residency. Participants were divided into two groups based on their residency sites; one group completed a traditional four-week orthopedic surgery rotation and the second group completed a four-week PCSM rotation. Forty-six of the forty-nine participants were administered the FB-MSK after completion of their rotations.

Results

Individual post-rotation scores significantly improved regardless of rotation (mean difference 2.78, p<0.001; 95% CI 2.05-3.52). The orthopedic surgery group significantly improved (mean difference 2.84, p<0.001; 95% CI 1.93-3.73) and the PCSM group significantly improved (mean difference 2.64, p=0.002; 95% CI 1.23-4.07). There was no significant difference in pre-rotation scores between the two groups (p=0.86; 95% CI -2.13 to 1.79). There was no significant difference in post-rotation scores between the two groups (p=0.66; 95% CI -1.98 to 1.26). There was no significant difference in mean score improvement between the two groups (p=0.81; 95% CI -1.33 to 1.69).

Conclusion

This study demonstrates significant MSK knowledge acquisition and no difference in the level of knowledge acquisition after completion of either traditional orthopedic surgery or PCSM residency rotation.

Recommended Musculoskeletal and Sports Medicine Model Curriculum for Emergency Medicine Residency Training

ABSTRACT

Musculoskeletal and sports medicine conditions are common in the emergency department (ED). Emergency physicians may not be receiving adequate education to achieve clinical competency in musculoskeletal medicine during residency training. This article aims to provide a standardized musculoskeletal and sports medicine curriculum for emergency medicine training. Broad curriculum goals include proficiency in evaluating and managing patients presenting to the ED with acute and chronic musculoskeletal complaints and other medical conditions related to or affected by physical exertion, sports participation, or environmental exposure. Specific objectives focus on knowledge of these disorders, physical examination skills, procedural skills including musculoskeletal ultrasound, appropriate consultation and referral, and patient education for these conditions. Educational methods will consist of didactics; online self-directed learning modules; simulation; and supervised clinical experiences in the ED, primary care sports medicine clinics, and orthopedic clinics if available. Curriculum implementation is expected to vary across programs due to differences in residency program structure and resources.

Intern Orthopedic Rotation Versus Emergency Medicine Procedure Month: Which one Derives More Opportunity?

INTRODUCTION

The American College of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) defines 18 "key procedures" as requirements in emergency medicine (EM) residency programs. The post-graduate year-1 (PGY-1) curriculum provides an early foundation for EM trainees to gain procedural experience, but traditional PGY-1 rotations may not provide robust procedural opportunities. Our objective was to replace a traditional orthopedic rotation with a 4-week rotation that emphasized EM procedure acquisition and comprehension. Although all residents met ACGME procedural requirements before the curricular modification, the purpose of this month was to increase overall procedure numbers. The block contained dedicated procedure shifts in the emergency department as well as an asynchronous, self-directed learning course. We sought to compare the number of procedures performed by PGY-1 residents during their orthopedic rotation (the year before implementation), to the number of procedures performed during their procedure rotation (the year after implementation).

METHODS

The total number of procedures performed and logged by PGY-1 residents during the traditional orthopedic rotation (during the year prior to implementation of the new procedure rotation) were compared to the total number of procedures by the first class to undergo the new procedure rotation the following year. Thirty resident logs were reviewed (15 per class). Data were analyzed using SAS NPAR1WAY; Z < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

When compared to the orthopedic rotation, the procedure rotation had statistically significant higher numbers of procedures per resident (22, standard deviation [SD] 12, vs 11.4, SD 7.6; Z = 0.0177). A wide variety of nonorthopedic procedures accounted for the increased numbers, (13.6, SD 10.3, vs 0.9, SD 0.9; Z < 0.001). While the average number of orthopedic procedures was slightly less on the procedure rotation, there was no statistical difference (orthopedic rotation 10.13, procedure rotation 8.26; Z = 0.4605). Notably, fewer procedures were performed when 2 residents were on the procedure rotation at the same time (21 vs 10.1).

CONCLUSION

This analysis demonstrated a larger number and a wider variety of procedures performed by PGY-1 residents during a dedicated procedure rotation compared to a traditional orthopedic rotation. Furthermore, exposure to orthopedic procedures did not decline significantly. Limitations of the study include a modest number of subjects. Data may be limited by the consistency of procedure logging by individual residents. Further studies may assess procedural competency after PGY-1 year of training.