Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T22:28:04.678Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

LO40: Describing CCFP(EM) programs in Canada: a national survey of program directors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2018

A. Nath*
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa, Department of Emergency Medicine, Ottawa, ON
K. Yadav
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa, Department of Emergency Medicine, Ottawa, ON
J. J. Perry
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa, Department of Emergency Medicine, Ottawa, ON
*
*Corresponding author

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Introduction: Enhanced skills training in emergency medicine (EM) for family physicians (CCFP(EM)) has existed since the 1970s. Accreditation standards define what every program must and should have, yet little is known on what is currently done across Canada. Our objectives were to: 1) describe major components of CCFP(EM) programs; and 2) determine how programs incorporate these components into their curriculum. Methods: A rigorous development process included expert content development and in-person pilot testing using Royal College Emergency Medicine Program Directors. An electronic survey questionnaire comprised of 63 questions was administered to all 17 CCFP(EM) program directors using a modified Dillman technique. Non-responders were sent a reminder email every 2 weeks over a 6-week period and an in-person reminder was given to non-responders at a face to face meeting 4 weeks after the initial survey was sent in June 2016. Results: All 17/17 (100%) program directors responded. There was considerable variation in administrative structure and financial support for each program. All programs provided ultrasound courses for basic skills (trauma, abdominal aortic aneurysm, intrauterine pregnancy). Variation exists for offering independent ultrasound certification (77%), advanced scanning (18%) and protected academic time for scanning (53%). All programs utilize high fidelity simulation. Some programs use in situ simulation (18%) and hold a simulation boot camp (41%). Most centres required an academic project, most commonly a quality assurance project (53%) and/or a critical appraisal of the literature (59%). Publication or national conference presentations were required by 12% of programs. Competency based assessments use simulation (88%) and direct observations (53%). Only 24% of programs have a transition to practice curriculum. All programs maintain strong connections to family medicine. Conclusion: This study demonstrates diverse structures of CCFP(EM) programs across Canada. Programs are similar regarding the provision of ultrasound, simulation and protected teaching time. Variation exists in administrative structure and financial resources of each program, academic project requirements, and how programs perform competency based assessments.

Type
Oral Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2018