Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 348
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 8  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 213-216

Emergency medicine resident involvement in emergency medical services

Department of Emergency Medicine, St. Luke's University Health Network, Pennsylvania, United States

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Adam M Ray
Department of Emergency Medicine, St. Luke's Bethlehem, 801 Ostrum St, Bethlehem, PA 18015
United States
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/ijam.ijam_116_21

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: Emergency medical services (EMS) are a critical component to Emergency Medicine (EM) residency training. In the United States, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) has established minimum training requirements for EM residency programs. Since the last study exploring resident EMS involvement was performed, there have been over 100 new EM resident programs started. Given the rapid increase in new EM programs, we sought to determine EMS experiences provided to current EM residents. Materials and Methods: A 22-question anonymous online survey was distributed through E-mail to program directors of approved EM residencies in October 2020. A follow-up reminder was sent 3 weeks later. Results: In total, 51 of 257 programs responded (20% response rate). Forty-five percent of EM residents experience between 10 and 25 EMS calls during their residency, 31% experience 26–50, and 20% experience >50 calls. The majority of programs (53%) have a separate EMS rotation where residents function as observers, 24% of residents function as providers, and 25% also have residents respond in a dedicated physician response vehicle. Aeromedical exposure is limited (47% have none and 43% average only 1–9 flights). Two-thirds of programs (67%) have residents provide online medical command during their ED shifts and 61% require residents to provide didactics to EMS clinicians. Despite ACGME requirements, only two-thirds of programs (69%) provide training about disaster/mass casualty incident (MCI) management and 67% have them participate in a disaster/MCI drill. About one-third of programs (31%) have decreased EMS experiences due to limited time in the residency curriculum, and 20% of programs have limited EMS experiences due to the COVID pandemic. Conclusions: The majority of responding EM residency programs meet ACGME EMS-related requirements. There is an opportunity for improvement around disaster education based on these data. Limited time in the curriculum and the COVID pandemic were cited as reasons that programs have limited their EMS experiences. The following core competencies are addressed in this article: Practice-Based Learning and Improvement, Medical Knowledge.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded40    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal