Ashley M Strobel1, Rose M Chasm2, Dale P Woolridge3. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Department of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, University of Minnesota School of Medicine, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 3. Department of Emergency Medicine, The University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, Arizona.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In 1998, emergency medicine-pediatrics (EM-PEDS) graduates were no longer eligible for the pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) sub-board certification examination. There is a paucity of guidance regarding the various training options for medical students who are interested in PEM. OBJECTIVES: We sought to to determine attitudes and personal satisfaction of graduates from EM-PEDS combined training programs. METHODS: We surveyed 71 graduates from three EM-PEDS residences in the United States. RESULTS: All respondents consider their combined training to be an asset when seeking a job, 92% find it to be an asset to their career, and 88% think it provided added flexibility to job searches. The most commonly reported shortcoming was their ineligibility for the PEM sub-board certification. The lack of this designation was perceived to be a detriment to securing academic positions in dedicated children's hospitals. When surveyed regarding which training offers the better skill set for the practice of PEM, 90% (44/49) stated combined EM-PEDS training. When asked which training track gives them the better professional advancement in PEM, 52% (23/44) chose combined EM-PEDS residency, 27% (12/44) chose a pediatrics residency followed by a PEM fellowship, and 25% (11/44) chose an EM residency then a PEM fellowship. No EM-PEDS respondents considered PEM fellowship training after the completion of the dual training program. CONCLUSION: EM-PEDS graduates found combined training to be an asset in their career. They felt that it provided flexibility in job searches, and that it was ideal training for the skill set required for the practice of PEM. EM-PEDS graduates' practices varied, including mixed settings, free-standing children's hospitals, and community emergency departments.
BACKGROUND: In 1998, emergency medicine-pediatrics (EM-PEDS) graduates were no longer eligible for the pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) sub-board certification examination. There is a paucity of guidance regarding the various training options for medical students who are interested in PEM. OBJECTIVES: We sought to to determine attitudes and personal satisfaction of graduates from EM-PEDS combined training programs. METHODS: We surveyed 71 graduates from three EM-PEDS residences in the United States. RESULTS: All respondents consider their combined training to be an asset when seeking a job, 92% find it to be an asset to their career, and 88% think it provided added flexibility to job searches. The most commonly reported shortcoming was their ineligibility for the PEM sub-board certification. The lack of this designation was perceived to be a detriment to securing academic positions in dedicated children's hospitals. When surveyed regarding which training offers the better skill set for the practice of PEM, 90% (44/49) stated combined EM-PEDS training. When asked which training track gives them the better professional advancement in PEM, 52% (23/44) chose combined EM-PEDS residency, 27% (12/44) chose a pediatrics residency followed by a PEM fellowship, and 25% (11/44) chose an EM residency then a PEM fellowship. No EM-PEDS respondents considered PEM fellowship training after the completion of the dual training program. CONCLUSION: EM-PEDS graduates found combined training to be an asset in their career. They felt that it provided flexibility in job searches, and that it was ideal training for the skill set required for the practice of PEM. EM-PEDS graduates' practices varied, including mixed settings, free-standing children's hospitals, and community emergency departments.
Authors: Nicole M Dubosh; Jaime Jordan; Lalena M Yarris; Edward Ullman; Joshua Kornegay; Daniel Runde; Amy Miller Juve; Jonathan Fisher Journal: AEM Educ Train Date: 2018-12-14