Dataset Information

Morbidity and Mortality Conference in Emergency Medicine Residencies and the Culture of Safety.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Morbidity and mortality conferences (M+M) are a traditional part of residency training and mandated by the Accreditation Counsel of Graduate Medical Education. This study's objective was to determine the goals, structure, and the prevalence of practices that foster strong safety cultures in the M+Ms of U.S. emergency medicine (EM) residency programs.

Methods

The authors conducted a national survey of U.S. EM residency program directors. The survey instrument evaluated five domains of M+M (Organization and Infrastructure; Case Finding; Case Selection; Presentation; and Follow up) based on the validated Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality Safety Culture survey.

Results

There was an 80% (151/188) response rate. The primary objectives of M+M were discussing adverse outcomes (53/151, 35%), identifying systems errors (47/151, 31%) and identifying cognitive errors (26/151, 17%). Fifty-six percent (84/151) of institutions have anonymous case submission, with 10% (15/151) maintaining complete anonymity during the presentation and 21% (31/151) maintaining partial anonymity. Forty-seven percent (71/151) of programs report a formal process to follow up on systems issues identified at M+M. Forty-four percent (67/151) of programs report regular debriefing with residents who have had their cases presented.

Conclusion

The structure and goals of M+Ms in EM residencies vary widely. Many programs lack features of M+M that promote a non-punitive response to error, such as anonymity. Other programs lack features that support strong safety cultures, such as following up on systems issues or reporting back to residents on improvements. Further research is warranted to determine if M+M structure is related to patient safety culture in residency programs.

SUBMITTER: Aaronson EL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4651575 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Morbidity and Mortality Conference in Emergency Medicine Residencies and the Culture of Safety.

Aaronson Emily L EL Wittels Kathleen A KA Nadel Eric S ES Schuur Jeremiah D JD

The western journal of emergency medicine 20151022 6

<h4>Introduction</h4>Morbidity and mortality conferences (M+M) are a traditional part of residency training and mandated by the Accreditation Counsel of Graduate Medical Education. This study's objective was to determine the goals, structure, and the prevalence of practices that foster strong safety cultures in the M+Ms of U.S. emergency medicine (EM) residency programs.<h4>Methods</h4>The authors conducted a national survey of U.S. EM residency program directors. The survey instrument evaluated ...[more]

PMID: 26594271

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveMorbidity and mortality conference (M&M) is common in emergency medicine (EM) and an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requirement. We aimed to characterize the prevalence of elements of EM M&M conferences that foster a strong culture of safety.MethodsEmergency medicine residents at 33 programs across the United States were surveyed using questions adapted from a previously tested survey of EM program directors and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Culture of Safety Survey.ResultsThe survey response rate was 80.3% (1,002/1,248). A total of 60.3% (601/997) of residents had not submitted a case of theirs to M&M in the past year. A total of 7.6% (73/954) reported that issues raised at M&M always led to change while 88.3% (842/954) reported that they sometimes did and 4.1% (39/954) reported that they never did. A total of 56.2% (536/954) responded that changes made due to M&M were reported back to the residents. Of residents who had cases presented at M&M, 24.2% (130/538) responded that there was regular debriefing, 65.2% (351/538) responded that there was not, and 10.6% (57/578) were unsure. A total of 10.2% (101/988) of respondents agreed that M&M was punitive, 17.4% were neutral (172/988), and 72.4% (715/988) disagreed. A total of 18.0% (178/987) of residents agreed that they felt pressure to order unnecessary tests because of M&M, 22.3% (220/987) were neutral, and 59.6% (589/987) disagreed. A total of 87.4% (862/986) felt that M&M was a valuable educational didactic session, and 78.3% (766/978) believed that M&M contributes to a culture of safety in their institution.ConclusionsWhile most residents believe that M&M is a valuable didactic session and contributes to institutional culture of safety, there are opportunities to improve by communicating changes made in response to M&M, debriefing residents who have had cases presented, and taking steps to make M&M not feel punitive to some residents.

Project description:IntroductionRadiology training is an important component of emergency medicine (EM) education, but its delivery has been variable. Program directors have reported a lack of radiology skills in incoming interns. A needs assessment is a crucial first step toward improving radiology education among EM residencies. Our objective was to explore the current state of radiology education in EM residency programs.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional survey study of all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited EM programs in the United States. Program leadership completed an online survey consisting of multiple choice, Likert scale, and free-response items. We calculated and reported descriptive statistics.ResultsOf eligible EM programs, 142/252 (56%) completed the survey including 105 postgraduate year (PGY) 1-3 and 36 PGY 1-4 programs. One respondent opted out of answering demographic questions. 23/141 (16%) were from the Western region, 29/141 (21%) were from the North Central region, 14/141 (10%) were from the South-Central region, 28/141 (20%) were from the Southeast region, and 47/141 (33%) were from the Northeast region. A total of 88/142 (62%) of responding programs did not have formal radiology instruction. Of the education that is provided, 127/142 (89%) provide it via didactics/lectures and 115/142 (81%) rely on instruction during clinical shifts. Only 51/142 (36%) provide asynchronous opportunities, and 23/142 (16%) have a dedicated radiology rotation. The majority of respondents reported spending 0-2 hours per month on radiology instruction (108/142; 76%); 95/141 (67%) reported that EM faculty "often" or "always" provide radiology instruction; 134/142 (95%), felt that it was "extremely" or "very important" for ED providers to be able to independently interpret radiograph results; and 129/142 (90.84%) either "sometimes" or "always" rely on their independent radiograph interpretations to make clinical decisions. The radiology studies identified as most important to be able to independently interpret were radiographs obtained for lines/tubes, chest radiographs, and radiographs obtained for musculoskeletal-related complaints.ConclusionA minority of EM residency programs have formal instruction in radiology despite the majority of responding program leadership believing that these are important skills. The most important curricular areas were identified. These results may inform the development of formal radiology curricula in EM graduate medical education.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Morbidity and mortality (M&M) conferences provide a forum for discussing adverse events and systems-based practice (SBP) issues; however, few models for implementing multidisciplinary, systems-focused M&M conferences exist. OBJECTIVE: To implement a new systems-focused M&M conference and evaluate success in focusing on adverse events and systems issues in a nonpunitive, multidisciplinary manner. METHODS: We implemented a new M&M conference into our large university-based internal medicine residency program. Using content analysis, we qualitatively analyzed audio recordings of M&M conferences from the first year of implementation (2010-2011) to determine the frequency of adverse events (injury resulting from medical care), SBP discussion, and allocation of blame. Multidisciplinary attendance was evaluated by attendance logs. Surveys assessed change in interns' perceptions of M&M conferences before and after the conference series (measured by median Likert-scale response) and trainee/faculty attitudes regarding the goal of M&M conferences. RESULTS: There were 226 attendees (66 faculty, 160 residents/fellows) at 9 M&M conferences. Average attendance per conference was 71, with representation from 16 disciplines. All M&M conferences (100%) included adverse events, SBP discussion, and lacked explicit individual blame. Interns' perceptions improved, including their belief that the M&M conference's purpose is systems improvement (4.35 versus 4.71, P = .02) and complications are discussed without blame (3.81 versus 4.34, P = .01). After experiencing M&M conferences, trainees/faculty reported favorable ratings, including beliefs that the M&M conference is important for education (97%) and the purpose is systems improvement (95%). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a new systems-focused M&M conference resulted in a conference series focusing on adverse events and associated system issues in a nonpunitive, multidisciplinary context.

Project description:Introduction:Evidence based medicine is the standard of modern health care practices. Ongoing biomedical research is needed to expand existing knowledge and improve quality of care, but it needs to reach clinicians to drive change. Journal articles and conference presentations are dissemination tools. The aim of the study was to establish the publication rate of scientific abstracts presented at the first and second African Conference of Emergency Medicine. The secondary objectives were establishing non-publication dissemination and the factors associated with publication and non-publication. Determining non-publication dissemination patterns and the factors associated with reasons for publishing or non-publication were also investigated. Methods:Presenters of the 129 scientific abstracts from the first and second African Conference of Emergency Medicine were invited to participate in an online survey. The survey was followed by a manual literature search to identify published manuscripts of authors that did not complete the survey, to determine the most accurate publication rate. Results:Thirty-one presenters responded (24%), of which 18 published in a peer-reviewed journal. An additional 25 publications were identified by the literature search. The overall publication rate was 33.3% (26.9% from 2012 and 40.3% from 2014). Oral presentations were more likely to be published (p?=?0.09). Sixteen manuscripts (37.2%) were published in the African Journal of Emergency Medicine. Presentations at local academic meetings were the most used platform beyond publication (43%). The main reason to publish was to add to the body of knowledge (100%), while lack of time (57%) was the major obstacle for not publishing. Conclusion:The overall publication rate for the first and second Africa Conferences of Emergency Medicine is comparable to other non-African Emergency Medicine conferences. The increasing publication trend between conferences might reflect the development of regional research capacity. Emergency Medicine providers in Africa need to be encouraged to participate in high quality, locally relevant research and to distribute those findings through accessible formats.

Dataset Information

Morbidity and Mortality Conference in Emergency Medicine Residencies and the Culture of Safety.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Morbidity and Mortality Conference in Emergency Medicine Residencies and the Culture of Safety.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets