Dataset Information

Variation in Intensive Care Unit Intubation Practices in Pulmonary Critical Care Medicine Fellowship.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Endotracheal intubation in the intensive care unit (ICU) is a high-risk procedure. Competence in endotracheal intubation is a requirement for Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine (PCCM) training programs, but fellow experience as the primary operator in intubating ICU patients has not been described on a large scale.

Objective

We hypothesized that significant variation surrounding endotracheal intubation practices in medical ICUs exists in United States (US) PCCM training programs.

Methods

We administered a survey to a convenience sample of US PCCM fellows to elicit typical intubation practices in the medical ICU.

Results

89 discrete US PCCM and Internal Medicine CCM training programs (77% response rate) were represented. At 43% of programs, the PCCM fellow was "always or almost always" designated the primary operator for intubation of a medical ICU patient, whereas at 21% of programs, the PCCM fellow was "rarely or never" the primary operator responsible for intubating in the ICU. Factors influencing this variation included time of day, hospital policies, attending skill or preference, ICU census and acuity, and patient factors. There was an association between location of the training program, but not program size, and whether the PCCM fellow was the primary operator.

Conclusion

There is significant variation in whether PCCM fellows are the primary operators to intubate medical ICU patients during training. Further work should explore how this variation affects fellow career development and competence in intubation.

SUBMITTER: Brady AK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7959255 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Rationale: Clinical and research training opportunities in global health are of increasing interest to medical trainees, but little is known about such opportunities in U.S.-based pulmonary and pulmonary/critical care medicine (PCCM) fellowship programs.Objectives: Summarize currently available global health-related training opportunities and identify potential barriers to implementing global health curricula among U.S.-based PCCM fellowship programs.Methods: We sent a confidential, online, targeted needs assessment to PCCM fellowship program directors and associate program directors. Data collected included program demographics, currently available global health-related clinical and research training opportunities, potential barriers to the implementation of global health-related programmatic content, and perceived interest in global health-related training opportunities by current and/or prospective trainees. To evaluate for nonresponse bias, we performed an online search to identify global health-related training opportunities offered by nonresponding programs.Results: Out of 171 surveyed programs, 63 PCCM fellowship programs (37%) provided survey responses. Most responses (n = 56, 89%) were from combined PCCM training programs; 66% (n = 40) of programs offered at least one component of global health-related clinical or research training. Overall, 27% (n = 17) had a Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award Institutional Research Training Grant (National Institutes of Health T32), 73% (n = 46) had fewer than 35 faculty members, and 51% (n = 32) had at least one faculty member conducting global health-focused research. Most responding programs (66%, n = 40) offered at least one global health-related educational component. Among programs that would like to offer global health-related training components, the most common barriers included competing priorities for lecture content and a lack of in-division mentors with global health experience, a champion for global health-related activities, and established partnerships outside the United States.Conclusions: PCCM program leaders are interested in offering global health-related training opportunities, but important barriers include lack of mentorship, dedicated fellowship time, and established global partnerships. Future research is needed to better understand global health-related interests and training needs of incoming fellows and to design creative solutions for providing global health-related training across academic institutions with variable global health-related training capacities.

Project description:Background: Dedicated ambulatory training during pulmonary and critical care medicine (PCCM) fellowships is often limited. A novel 2-year longitudinal outpatient pulmonary fellowship curriculum was previously developed, piloted, and studied. The exportability and potential impact of this ambulatory curriculum on PCCM fellowship training nationally is not known. Objective: We aim to understand the current state of ambulatory training in PCCM fellowships and the impact of a standardized outpatient curriculum on fellows' ambulatory knowledge and competency. Methods: Nineteen programs participated in the study from 2017 to 2019. Six programs received the first year of content, seven programs received the entire 2-year curriculum, and seven programs served as a control. Fellows, faculty, and program directors (PDs) completed a series of surveys assessing satisfaction with ambulatory education and the curriculum. Fellows completed a series of medical knowledge inventories, and programs submitted in-training exam scores. Results: A total of 221 fellows (39%) and 17 PDs (89%) completed the precurriculum surveys, and 38 (12%) fellows and 10 (53%) PDs completed postcurriculum surveys. Before curriculum implementation, only 34.4% of fellows rated the quality of their ambulatory education as good or outstanding compared with 57.9% at the end of the study. Eighty-five percent of faculty and 89% of PDs rated the curriculum as good or excellent. Faculty believed that the teaching scripts were easy to use (78.4%), were factually accurate (86.3%), and provided high-yield information (82.1%). The majority of PDs indicated that the curriculum positively impacted patient care (78%) and fulfilled an unmet educational need (100%), and most planned to continue the curriculum after the study (78%). Feedback surrounded the need for updated content based on recently published guidelines and studies. Conclusion: The curriculum is a standardized and feasible way to address a previously unmet need in PCCM fellowship education. PDs rated the curriculum highly and most plan to continue it in the future. Our limited data set suggests that the curriculum was well received by fellows and faculty and positively impacted perceptions of ambulatory education and preparedness for independent practice. Future study with a larger sample of fellows is needed to better understand the generalizability of these findings.