Simulation in Pediatric Emergency Medicine Fellowships

Author:

Doughty Cara B.1,Kessler David O.2,Zuckerbraun Noel S.3,Stone Kimberly P.4,Reid Jennifer R.4,Kennedy Christopher S.5,Nypaver Michele M.6,Auerbach Marc A.7

Affiliation:

1. Department of Pediatrics, Section of Emergency Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas;

2. Department of Pediatrics, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York;

3. Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania;

4. Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Washington, and Seattle Children’s Hospital, Seattle, Washington;

5. Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Missouri, Kansas City, Missouri;

6. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan; and

7. Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Graduate medical education faces challenges as programs transition to the next accreditation system. Evidence supports the effectiveness of simulation for training and assessment. This study aims to describe the current use of simulation and barriers to its implementation in pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) fellowship programs. METHODS: A survey was developed by consensus methods and distributed to PEM program directors via an anonymous online survey. RESULTS: Sixty-nine (95%) fellowship programs responded. Simulation-based training is provided by 97% of PEM fellowship programs; the remainder plan to within 2 years. Thirty-seven percent incorporate >20 simulation hours per year. Barriers include the following: lack of faculty time (49%) and faculty simulation experience (39%); limited support for learner attendance (35%); and lack of established curricula (32%). Of those with written simulation curricula, most focus on resuscitation (71%), procedures (63%), and teamwork/communication (38%). Thirty-seven percent use simulation to evaluate procedural competency and resuscitation management. PEM fellows use simulation to teach (77%) and have conducted simulation-based research (33%). Thirty percent participate in a fellows’ “boot camp”; however, finances (27%) and availability (15%) limit attendance. Programs receive simulation funding from hospitals (47%), academic institutions (22%), and PEM revenue (17%), with 22% reporting no direct simulation funding. CONCLUSIONS: PEM fellowships have rapidly integrated simulation into their curricula over the past 5 years. Current limitations primarily involve faculty and funding, with equipment and dedicated space less significant than previously reported. Shared curricula and assessment tools, increased faculty and financial support, and regionalization could ameliorate barriers to incorporating simulation into PEM fellowships.

Publisher

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

Subject

Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health

Cited by 29 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3