Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
-
Comparative Study
A model for an integrated emergency medicine/trauma service.
To describe a model for an integrated multidisciplinary trauma service and to compare survival outcomes for patients resuscitated by either emergency medicine (EM) or surgical housestaff assigned to the trauma service. ⋯ These results suggest that in this model of integrated EM/trauma service, equivalent survival outcomes occur whether EM or surgery housestaff act as team leaders.
-
To assess the reliability of faculty evaluations of non-emergency medicine (non-EM) residents during clinical ED rotations and to determine the effect that the "leniency" of grading by these evaluators had on the residents' final evaluations. ⋯ There is significant variability in the scoring patterns of individual evaluators. The evaluators in this study showed large variations in both leniency (as measured by their mean score) and range restriction (as measured by their SD). The differences in evaluator scoring leniency have a moderate correlation with the overall score received by the resident.
-
Comparative Study
The psychological effects of a four-week emergency medicine rotation on residents in training.
To prospectively evaluate psychological stress reactions among residents in an emergency medicine (EM) rotation during a 4-week period. ⋯ A significant increase in psychologic distress was found among the non-EM residents during an EM rotation. The EM residents showed a trend for a decrease in psychological distress over the same 4-week period.
-
To test the overall reliability of a performance-based clinical skill assessment for entering emergency medicine (EM) residents. Also, to investigate the reliability of separate reporting of diagnostic and management scores for a standardized patient case, subjective scoring of patient notes, and interstation exercise scores. ⋯ SPs can be used to reliably assess bedside clinical skills of EM residents. While component reliability levels are slightly lower than the global clinical skill reliability coefficient, they are still high enough to use for identification of individual strengths and weaknesses.