scholarly journals Research Priorities for Physician Wellness in Academic Emergency Medicine: Consensus from the Society of Academic Emergency Medicine Wellness Committee

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. S40-S47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arlene S. Chung ◽  
Matthew L. Wong ◽  
Leon D. Sanchez ◽  
Dave W. Lu ◽  
Rita A. Manfredi ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 386-392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Hawk ◽  
Rachel Glick ◽  
Arthur Jey ◽  
Syndey Gaylor ◽  
Jamie Doucet ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerben Keijzers ◽  
Ogilvie Thom ◽  
David Taylor ◽  
Jonathan Knott ◽  

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (12) ◽  
pp. 1365-1374 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liza Bialy ◽  
Amy C. Plint ◽  
Stephen B. Freedman ◽  
David W. Johnson ◽  
Janet A. Curran ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 104 (9) ◽  
pp. 869-873 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Bressan ◽  
Luigi Titomanlio ◽  
Borja Gomez ◽  
Santiago Mintegi ◽  
Alain Gervaix ◽  
...  

ObjectiveResearch in European Paediatric Emergency Medicine (REPEM) network is a collaborative group of 69 paediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physicians from 20 countries in Europe, initiated in 2006. To further improve paediatric emergency care in Europe, the aim of this study was to define research priorities for PEM in Europe to guide the development of future research projects.Design and SettingWe carried out an online survey in a modified three-stage Delphi study. Eligible participants were members of the REPEM network. In stage 1, the REPEM steering committee prepared a list of research topics. In stage 2, REPEM members rated on a 6-point scale research topics and they could add research topics and comment on the list for further refinement. Stage 3 included further prioritisation using the Hanlon Process of Prioritisation (HPP) to give more emphasis to the feasibility of a research topic.ResultsBased on 52 respondents (response rates per stage varying from 41% to 57%), we identified the conditions ‘fever’, ‘sepsis’ and ‘respiratory infections’, and the processes/interventions ‘biomarkers’, ‘risk stratification’ and ‘practice variation’ as common themes of research interest. The HPP identified highest priority for 4 of the 5 highest prioritised items by the Delphi process, incorporating prevalence and severity of each condition and feasibility of undertaking such research.ConclusionsWhile the high diversity in emergency department (ED) populations, cultures, healthcare systems and healthcare delivery in European PEM prompts to focus on practice variation of ED conditions, our defined research priority list will help guide further collaborative research efforts within the REPEM network to improve PEM care in Europe.


2017 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. S166
Author(s):  
K. Williamson ◽  
P. Lank ◽  
N. Wheaton ◽  
A. Olson ◽  
N. Olson ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (11) ◽  
pp. 864-868 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart Hartshorn ◽  
Ronan O'Sullivan ◽  
Ian K Maconochie ◽  
Catherine Bevan ◽  
Francesca Cleugh ◽  
...  

CJEM ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (S1) ◽  
pp. S50
Author(s):  
S. Yiu ◽  
M. Yeung ◽  
L. Fischer ◽  
J. Frank

Innovation Concept: Transition to independent practice is challenging and early career physicians are more prone to burnout and error. Despite recommendations for formal mentorship to support physicians, only 43.6% of US academic Emergency Medicine departments have such programs. We describe an innovative mentorship program designed to support these early career physicians and enhance quality of care, career longevity, and wellness. We operationalized mentorship in which experienced, highly regarded, empathic mentors guide mentees in their personal and professional development. Methods: In this program two Emergency Physician mentors were teamed with each newly hired Emergency Physician. Mentees could request their own mentors, and teams were matched on the basis of shared personal and academic interests. Mentors received academic funding and training on good mentorship practice, roles and responsibilities, and feedback. Teams had to meet formally at least twice a year, with additional contact as needed. While mentees set the meeting agenda, teams were also encouraged to address four main areas. These areas were identified from a targeted needs assessment and literature review. They include: 1) clinical process and care, 2) departmental structure and culture, 3) teaching and scholarship, and 4) physician wellness. After meetings, mentees summarized and submitted the topics discussed and reflected on action plans. An oversight committee supported the program. Curriculum, Tool or Material: All nine (9) newly hired physicians joined the program in Fall 2018. As of December 2018, six (6) teams have had formal meetings. They discussed the following areas: clinical processes and care (50%), departmental structure and culture (100%), teaching and scholarship (67%), and physician wellness (100%). Other areas discussed include: academic career, financial planning, and networking. Teams spent 20-60% of the time formulating steps to achieve mentee career goals. They spent 40-60% of the time discussing skills and resources needed. End of year program evaluation will include outcomes such as satisfaction, value, effectiveness, projects, promotions, and awards. The results will shape future program design. Conclusion: We implemented a mentorship program for newly hired Emergency Physicians. As mentorship is integral to successful transition to independent practice, this program model could be highly beneficial to other academic Emergency Medicine departments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document