Kristen Grabow Moore1, Andrew Ketterer2, Natasha Wheaton3, Paul Logan Weygandt4, Holly A Caretta-Weyer5, Jeremy Berberian6, Jaime Jordan7. 1. is Assistant Professor, Department of Emergency Medicine, Emory University. 2. is Clinical Instructor and Assistant Residency Program Director, Department of Emergency Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School. 3. is Associate Clinical Professor, Associate Program Director, and Medical Student Clerkship Director, Department of Emergency Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). 4. is Assistant Professor, Department of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. 5. is Assistant Professor and Associate Residency Program Director, Department of Emergency Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine. 6. is Assistant Professor, Department of Emergency Medicine, Christiana Care Health System. 7. is Associate Professor of Clinical Emergency Medicine, Associate Program Director, and Vice Chair, Acute Care College, Department of Emergency Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Leaders in graduate medical education must provide robust clinical and didactic experiences to prepare residents for independent practice. Programs traditionally create didactic experiences individually, requiring tremendous resources with variable content exposure and quality. OBJECTIVE: We sought to create and implement a free, open access, learner-centric, level-specific, emergency medicine (EM) residency curriculum. METHODS: We developed Foundations of Emergency Medicine (FoEM) Foundations I and II courses using Kern's model of curriculum development. Fundamental topics were identified through content guidelines from the American Board of Emergency Medicine. We incorporated learner-centric strategies into 2 flipped classroom, case-based courses targeting postgraduate year (PGY) 1 and PGY-2 residents. The curriculum was made freely available online in 2016. Faculty and resident users were surveyed annually for feedback, which informed iterative refinement of the curriculum. RESULTS: Between 2016 and 2020, registration for FoEM expanded from 2 sites with 36 learners to 154 sites and 4453 learners. In 2019, 98 of 102 (96%) site leaders and 1618 of 2996 (54%) learners completed the evaluative survey. One hundred percent of responding leaders and 93% of learners were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with FoEM content. Faculty and residents valued FoEM's usability, large volume of content, quality, adaptability, organization, resident-faculty interaction, and resident-as-teacher opportunities. Challenges to implementation included resident attendance, conference structure, technology limitations, and faculty engagement. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and implemented a learner-centric, level-specific, national EM curriculum that has been widely adopted in the United States.
BACKGROUND: Leaders in graduate medical education must provide robust clinical and didactic experiences to prepare residents for independent practice. Programs traditionally create didactic experiences individually, requiring tremendous resources with variable content exposure and quality. OBJECTIVE: We sought to create and implement a free, open access, learner-centric, level-specific, emergency medicine (EM) residency curriculum. METHODS: We developed Foundations of Emergency Medicine (FoEM) Foundations I and II courses using Kern's model of curriculum development. Fundamental topics were identified through content guidelines from the American Board of Emergency Medicine. We incorporated learner-centric strategies into 2 flipped classroom, case-based courses targeting postgraduate year (PGY) 1 and PGY-2 residents. The curriculum was made freely available online in 2016. Faculty and resident users were surveyed annually for feedback, which informed iterative refinement of the curriculum. RESULTS: Between 2016 and 2020, registration for FoEM expanded from 2 sites with 36 learners to 154 sites and 4453 learners. In 2019, 98 of 102 (96%) site leaders and 1618 of 2996 (54%) learners completed the evaluative survey. One hundred percent of responding leaders and 93% of learners were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with FoEM content. Faculty and residents valued FoEM's usability, large volume of content, quality, adaptability, organization, resident-faculty interaction, and resident-as-teacher opportunities. Challenges to implementation included resident attendance, conference structure, technology limitations, and faculty engagement. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and implemented a learner-centric, level-specific, national EM curriculum that has been widely adopted in the United States.
Authors: Tait D Shanafelt; Colin P West; Jeff A Sloan; Paul J Novotny; Greg A Poland; Ron Menaker; Teresa A Rummans; Lotte N Dyrbye Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2009-05-25
Authors: Michael S Beeson; Felix Ankel; Rahul Bhat; Joshua S Broder; Sara Paradise Dimeo; Diane L Gorgas; Jonathan S Jones; Viral Patel; Elizabeth Schiller; Jacob W Ufberg; Julia N Keehbauch Journal: J Emerg Med Date: 2020-05-29 Impact factor: 1.484
Authors: Jeff Riddell; Paul Jhun; Cha-Chi Fung; James Comes; Stacy Sawtelle; Ramin Tabatabai; Daniel Joseph; Jan Shoenberger; Esther Chen; Christopher Fee; Stuart P Swadron Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2017-08
Authors: Abigail Ford Winkel; Sigrid B Tristan; Margaret Dow; Carrie Racsumberger; Erica Bove; Darya Valantsevich; Mark B Woodland Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2020-08