Methods: Three emergency physicians independently mapped the HPM-EM competencies onto the 2019 EM Model items and the 2021 KSAs. Discrepancies were resolved by a fourth independent reviewer, and the final mapping was reviewed by all team members.

Results: The EM Model included 78% (18/23) of the HPM competencies as a direct match, and we identified recommended areas for incorporating the other five. The KSAs included 43% (10/23). Most HPM competencies included in the KSAs mapped onto at least one level B (minimal necessary for competency) KSA. Three HPM competencies were not clearly included in the EM Model or in the KSAs (treating end-of-life symptoms, caring for the imminently dying, and caring for patients under hospice care).

Conclusion: The majority of HPM-EM competencies are included in the current EM Model and KSAs and correspond to knowledge needed to be competent in EM. Programs relying on the EM Milestones to plan their curriculums may miss training in symptom management and care for patients at the end of life or who are on hospice.

Introduction: Emotional Intelligence (EI) is defined as an ability to perceive another’s emotional state combined with an ability to modify one’s own. Physicians with this ability are at a distinct advantage, both in fostering teams and in making sound decisions. Studies have shown that higher physician EI’s are associated with lower incidence of burn-out, longer careers, more positive patient-physician interactions, increased empathy, and improved communication skills. We explored the potential for EI to be learned as a skill (as opposed to being an innate ability) through a brief educational intervention with emergency medicine (EM) residents.

Methods: This study was conducted at a large urban EM residency program. Residents were randomized to either EI intervention or control groups. The intervention was a two-hour session focused on improving the skill of social perspective taking (SPT), a skill related to social awareness. Due to time limitations, we used a 10-item sample of the Hay 360 Emotional Competence Inventory to measure EI at three time points for the training group: before (pre) and after (post) training, and at six-months post training (follow up); and at two time points for the control group: pre- and follow up. The preliminary analysis was a four-way analysis of variance with one repeated measure: Group x Gender x Program Year over Time. We also completed post-hoc tests.

Results: Thirty-three EM residents participated in the study (33 of 36, 92%), 19 in the EI intervention group and 14 in the control group. We found a significant interaction effect between Group and Time (p<0.05). Post-hoc tests revealed a significant increase in EI scores from Time 1 to 3 for the EI intervention group (62.6% to 74.2%), but no statistical change was observed for the controls (66.8% to 66.1%, p=0.77). We observed no main effects involving gender or level of training.

Conclusion: Our brief EI training showed a delayed but statistically significant positive impact on EM residents six months after the intervention involving SPT. One possible explanation for this finding is that residents required time to process and apply the EI skills training in order for us to detect measurable change. More rigorous measurement will be needed in future studies to aid in the interpretation of our findings.

Background: The emergency medicine (EM) milestones are objective behaviors that are categorized into thematic domains called “subcompetencies” (eg, emergency stabilization). The scale for rating milestones is predicated on the assumption that a rating (level) of 1.0 corresponds to an incoming EM-1 resident and a rating of 4.0 is the “target rating” (albeit not an expectation) for a graduating resident. Our aim in this study was to determine the frequency with which graduating residents received the target milestone ratings.

Methods: This retrospective, cross-sectional study was a secondary analysis of a dataset used in a prior study but was not reported previously. We analyzed milestone subcompetency ratings from April 25–June 24, 2022 for categorical EM residents in their final year of training. Ratings were dichotomized as meeting the expected level at the time of program completion (ratings of ≥3.5) and not meeting the expected level at the time of program completion (ratings of ≤3.0). We calculated the number of residents who did not achieve target ratings for each of the subcompetencies.

Results: In Spring 2022, of the 2,637 residents in the spring of their last year of training, 1,613 (61.2%)
achieved a rating of ≥3.5 on every subcompetency and 1,024 (38.8%) failed to achieve that rating on at least one subcompetency. There were 250 residents (9.5%) who failed to achieve half of their expected
subcompetency ratings and 105 (4.0%) who failed to achieve the expected rating (ie, rating was ≤3.0) on every subcompetency.

Conclusion: When using an EM milestone rating threshold of 3.5, only 61.2% of physicians achieved the target ratings for program graduation; 4.0% of physicians failed to achieve target ratings for any milestone subcompetency; and 9.5% of physicians failed to achieve the target ratings for graduating residents in half of the subcompetencies.

Background: Emergency medicine (EM) resident training is guided by the American Board of Emergency Medicine Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine (EM Model) and the EM Milestones as developed based on the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSA) list. These are consensus documents developed by a collaborative working group of seven national EM organizations. External experts in geriatric EM also developed competency recommendations for EM residency education in geriatrics, but these are not being taught in many residency programs. Our objective was to evaluate how the geriatric EM competencies integrate/overlap with the EM Model and KSAs to help residency programs include them in their educational curricula.

Methods: Trained emergency physicians independently mapped the geriatric resident competencies onto the 2019 EM Model items and the 2021 KSAs using Excel spreadsheets. Discrepancies were resolved by an independent reviewer with experience with the EM Model development and resident education, and the final mapping was reviewed by all team members.

Results: The EM Model included 77% (20/26) of the geriatric competencies. The KSAs included most of the geriatric competencies (81%, 21/26). All but one of the geriatric competencies mapped onto either the EM Model or the KSAs. Within the KSAs, most of the geriatric competencies mapped onto necessary level skills (ranked B, C, D, or E) with only five (8%) also mapping onto advanced skills (ranked A).

Conclusion: All but one of the geriatric EM competencies mapped to the current EM Model and KSAs. The geriatric competencies correspond to knowledge at all levels of training within the KSAs, from beginner to expert in EM. Educators in EM can use this mapping to integrate the geriatric competencies within their curriculums.