• Benjamin B Constance, Paul S Auerbach, and David H Johe.
• Stanford/Kaiser Emergency Medicine Residency, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. benbc@stanford.edu
• Wilderness Environ Med. 2012 Jun 1;23(2):177-89.

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to identify the differences between the educational curricula, skill sets, and funds of knowledge required for certification as an Outdoor Emergency Care Technician (OEC-T), Emergency Medical Technician (EMT), and Emergency Medical Responder (EMR).MethodsWe directly and in detail compared topics and skills presented in the OEC-T curriculum with those presented in the EMT and EMR education and training curricula.ResultsThe information and skills taught in the OEC-T curriculum are in general more extensive than those taught in EMR training but are not equivalent to EMT. The OEC-T program has more depth in environmental medical issues, such as altitude illness, hyperthermia and hypothermia. Completion of the EMR program is 112 hours shorter and constitutes 30% of the duration of the EMT program. Completion of the OEC-T program (for certification only and not including additional "on-hill" patroller training) is 80 hours shorter and is half the duration of the EMT program.ConclusionsThe OEC-T curriculum includes a skill set and fund of knowledge that exceeds those of the EMR program, but does not include all the knowledge needed for an EMT program. The OEC-T program prepares out-of-hospital providers to care for patients in the wilderness, with special emphasis on snowsports pathology. The EMT program places a greater emphasis on medical disease and emergency medication administration. These differences should be considered when determining staffing requirements for agencies caring for patients with snowsports pathology.Copyright © 2012 Wilderness Medical Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

16 keywords...

hide…