CJEM Articles: teaching
Displaying 1-4 of 4 results
-
November
2011
13
6
Diane M. Birnbaumer
-
September
2011
13
5
Catherine Patocka, Christine Meyers, J. Scott Delaney
Introduction:
The ability to teach is a critical component of residency and future practice. This is recognized by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, which incorporates teaching functions into the CanMEDS competencies. The aim of our study was to identify how emergency medicine specialty programs across Canada prepare their residents for roles as teachers and to compare these results to those of other Royal College specialty programs.
Methods:
A 40-item English questionnaire was developed and translated into French. It was e-mailed to the program directors of all Royal College Emergency Medicine (EM), Anesthesia, Diagnostic Radiology, General Surgery, Internal Medicine, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatrics, and Psychiatry residency programs. The survey asked what modalities were in use to teach residents how to teach and allowed respondents to comment on recent changes.
Results:
Twelve of 13 (92%) EM programs and 78 of 113 (69%) other specialty programs responded. All responding programs incorporated some kind of mandatory teaching responsibilities. Four of 12 (33%) EM programs reserved formal teaching functions for postgraduate year 3 and above, whereas only 7 of 78 (9%) other specialty programs did so. The remaining 71 of 78 (91%) non-EM specialty programs incorporated formal teaching functions in all years of residency. Six of 12 (50%) EM programs offered rotations in clinical medical education compared to only 11 of 78 (14%) other specialty programs.
Conclusions:
Canadian EM programs appear to differ from other specialty programs in the way that they develop residents-as-teachers. Half of EM programs offer rotations in clinical medical education, and many introduce formal teaching functions later in residency.
-
January
2009
11
1
James Stempien, Martin Betz
Introduction: The American Heart Association (AHA) revises the Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) course approximately every 5 years, citing the scientific literature for any changes to content and management recommendations. With ACLS 2005, the AHA also revised the methods used to teach course content. The AHA cited no evidence in making these changes. The ACLS 2005 course, distributed in early 2007, makes greater use of videos to teach students. This prospective study surveyed opinions of both students and instructors in an effort to determine the level of satisfaction with this method of teaching.
Methods: During 16 consecutive ACLS courses, all students and instructors were asked to complete a questionnaire. The students provided demographic information, but completed the survey anonymously. Four questions probed the participants' opinions about the effectiveness of videos in learning ACLS skills. Experienced participants were asked to compare the new teaching methods with previous courses. Opinions were compared among several subgroups based on sex, occupation and previous experience.
Results: Of the 180 students who participated, 71% felt the videos were unequivocally useful for teaching ACLS skills. Fewer first-time students were unequivocally positive (59%) compared with those who had taken 2 or more previous courses (84%). A small proportion of students (13%) desired more hands-on practice time. Of the 16 instructors who participated, 31% felt that the videos were useful for teaching ACLS skills. No differences were found between doctors and nurses, or between men and women.
Conclusion: The use of standardized videos in ACLS courses was felt by the majority of students and a minority of instructors to be unequivocally useful. First-time students had more doubts about the effectiveness of videos.
-
January
2005
7
1
Glen W. Bandiera, Laurie Morrison
Background: Little is known about factors affecting emergency physician attendance at formal academic teaching sessions or what emergency physicians believe to be the benefits derived from attending these activities.
Objectives: To determine what factors influence emergency medicine faculty attendance at formal academic rounds, what benefits they derive from attendance, and what differences in perceptions there are between full-time clinical and part-time clinical academic faculty.
Methods: A survey was sent to all emergency physicians with academic appointments at one institution. Responses were tabulated dichotomously (yes/no) for checklist answers and analyzed using a 2-person grounded theory approach for open answers based on an a priori analysis plan. Differences between full-time and part-time faculty were compared using the chi-squared test for significance.
Results: Response rate was 73.8% (48/65). Significant impediments to attendance included clinical responsibilities (75%), professional responsibilities (52.1%), personal responsibilities (33.3%), location (31.2%) and time (27.1%). Perceived benefits of attending rounds were: continuing medical education, social interaction, teaching opportunities, interaction with residents, comparing one's practice with peers, improving teaching techniques, and enjoyment of the format. There were no statistically significant differences between groups' responses.
Conclusions: Emergency physicians in our study attend formal teaching sessions infrequently, suggesting that the perceived benefits do not outweigh impediments to attendance. The single main impediment, competing responsibilities, is difficult to modify for emergency physicians. Strategies to increase faculty attendance should focus on enhancing the main perceived benefits: continuing medical education, social interaction and educational development. Faculty learn from themselves and from residents during formal teaching sessions.
