Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T02:05:29.815Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Emergency medicine teaching faculty perceptions about formal academic sessions: “What’s in it for us?”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2015

Glen W. Bandiera  and
Laurie Morrison
Glen W. Bandiera*
Affiliation:
Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ont., and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont.
Laurie Morrison
Affiliation:
Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ont., and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont.
*
Department of Emergency Services, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond St., Toronto ON M5B 1W8; 416 864-5095, fax 416 864-5341, glen.bandiera@utoronto.ca

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.
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.

Keywords

medical educationresidencyfaculty developmentteachinggrand rounds
Type
Education • Éducation
Information
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , January 2005 , pp. 36 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2005

References

1.Kroenke, K, Simmons, JO, Copley, JB, Smith, C. Attending rounds: a survey of physician attitudes. J Gen Intern Med 1990;5(3):229–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.FitzGerald, JD, Wenger, NS. Didactic teaching conferences for IM residents: Who attends, and is attendance related to medical certifying examination scores? Acad Med 2003;78(1):84–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Markova, T, Roth, LM. E-conferencing for delivery of residency didactics. Acad Med 2002;77(7):748–9.Google Scholar
4.Parrino, TA, White, AT. Grand rounds revisited: results of a survey of US Departments of Medicine. Am J Med 1990;89 (4):491–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Zweifler, J, Ringel, M, Maudlin, RK, Blossom, HJ. Extended educational sessions at three family medicine residency programs. Acad Med 1996;71(10):1059–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Frank, J, Jabour, M, Tugwell, P, Boyd, D, Labrosse, J, MacFadyen, J, et al; for the Societal Needs Working Group. Skills for the new millennium: report of the Societal Needs Working Group — CanMEDS 2000 Project. Sept 1996. Available: http://meds.queensu.ca/medicine/pbl/CanMeds2000.htm (accessed 2004 Nov 18).Google Scholar
7.Schindler, N, Winchester, DP, Sherman, H. Recognizing clinical faculty’s contributions in education. Acad Med 2002;77(9):940–1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Davis, D, Ringel, M, Maudlin, RK, Blossom, HJ. Impact of formal continuing medical education: Do conferences, workshops, rounds, and other traditional continuing education activities change physician behavior or health care outcomes? JAMA 1999;282(9):867–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Silverman, D. Analyzing talk and text, in the handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 2001. p. 821–34.Google Scholar
10.Miles, MB, Huberman, AM. Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 1994.Google Scholar
11.Rubin, HJ, Rubin, IS. What did you hear? Qualitative interviewing: the art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 1995. p. 226–56.Google Scholar
12.Lloyd, S, Streiner, D, Shannon, S. Burnout, depression, life and job satisfaction among Canadian emergency physicians. J Emerg Med 1994;12(4):559–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Steiner, IP, Yoon, PW, Goldsand, G, Rowe, BH. Resource contribution by Canadian faculties of medicine to the discipline of emergency medicine. Can J Emerg Med 2001;3(1):13–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Allen, M, Sargeant, J, MacDougall, E, O’Brien, B. Evaluation of videoconferenced grand rounds. J Telemed Telecare 2002;8(4):210–6.Google Scholar
15.Boots, RJ, Treloar, C. Prediction of intern attendance at a seminar-based training programme: a behavioural intention model. Med Educ 2000;34(7):512–8.Google Scholar