Dataset Information

Direct versus indirect supervision of fellows covering football events: a survey of fellows and program directors.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) program requirements mandate "adequate supervision," of residents, but there is little guidance for sports medicine fellowship directors regarding the transition from direct to indirect supervision of fellows covering football games. OBJECTIVE: We sought to gather evidence of current supervision practices in the context of injury outcomes. METHODS: Fellows and program directors of ACGME-accredited sports medicine fellowship programs were invited to complete an online survey regarding their experience and current supervision practice at football games. Criteria for transition to autonomy and desired changes in supervision practice were elicited. Player safety was quantified by noting the number of field-side emergencies, whether an attending was present, and whether better outcomes might have resulted from the presence of an attending. RESULTS: A total of 80 fellows and 50 program directors completed the online survey. Direct supervision was lacking in about 50% of high school games and 20% of college games. A resulting cost in terms of player safety was estimated to apply to 5% of serious injuries by fellows' report but less than 0.5% by directors' report. Written criteria for transitioning from direct supervision to autonomy were the exception rather than the rule. The majority of fellows and directors expressed satisfaction with the current level of supervision, but 20% of fellows would prefer more supervision through postgame review. CONCLUSIONS: Football games covered by fellows are often not directly supervised. Absence of an attending affected the outcomes of 5% or less of serious injuries. Transition to autonomy does not usually require meeting written criteria. Fellows might benefit from additional off-site supervision.

SUBMITTER: Lascano CA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2951787 | biostudies-other | 2010 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesHospital rounds are a traditional vehicle for patient-care delivery and experiential learning for trainees. We aimed to characterize practices and perceptions of rounds in United States nephrology training programs.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe conducted a national survey of United States nephrology fellows and program directors. Fellows received the survey after completing the 2019 National Board of Medical Examiners Nephrology In-Training Exam. Program directors received the survey at the American Society of Nephrology's 2019 Nephrology Training Program Directors' Retreat. Surveys assessed the structure and perceptions of rounds, focusing on workload, workflow, value for patient care, and fellows' clinical skill-building. Directors were queried about their expectations for fellow prerounds and efficiency of rounds. Responses were quantified by proportions.ResultsFellow and program director response rates were 73% (n=621) and 70% (n=55). Most fellows (74%) report a patient census of >15, arrive at the hospital before 7:00 am (59%), and complete progress notes after 5:00 pm (46%). Among several rounding activities, fellows most valued bedside discussions for building their clinical skills (34%), but only 30% examine all patients with the attending at the bedside. Most directors (71%) expect fellows to both examine patients and collect data before attending-rounds. A majority (78%) of directors commonly complete their documentation after 5:00 pm, and for 36%, after 8:00 pm. Like fellows, directors most value bedside discussion for development of fellows' clinical skills (44%). Lack of preparedness for the rigors of nephrology fellowship was the most-cited barrier to efficient rounds (31%).ConclusionsHospital rounds in United States nephrology training programs are characterized by high patient volumes, early-morning starts, and late-evening clinical documentation. Fellows use a variety of prerounding styles and examine patients at the beside with their attendings at different frequencies.PodcastThis article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2020_03_17_CJN.10190819.mp3.

Project description:Rationale & objectiveAdoption of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) into nephrology practice has been relatively slow. We surveyed US nephrology program directors, their fellows, and graduates from a single training program regarding current/planned POCUS training, clinical use, and barriers to training and use.Study designAnonymous, online survey.Setting & participantsAll US nephrology program directors (n=151), their fellows (academic year 2021-2022), and 89/90 graduates (1980-2021) of the Walter Reed Nephrology Program.Analytical approachDescriptive.Results46% (69/151) of program directors and 33% (118/361) of their fellows responded. Response rate was 62% (55/89) for Walter Reed graduates. 51% of program directors offered POCUS training, most commonly bedside training in non-POCUS oriented rotations (71%), didactic lectures (68%), and simulation (43%). 46% of fellows reported receiving POCUS training, but of these, many reported not being sufficiently trained/not confident in kidney (56%), bladder (50%), and inferior vena cava assessment (46%). Common barriers to training reported by program directors were not enough trained faculty (78%), themselves not being sufficiently trained (55%), and equipment expense (51%). 64% of program directors and 55% of fellows reported <10% of faculty were able to perform POCUS. 64% of fellows reported having too little POCUS training. 72% of program directors and 77% of graduates felt POCUS should be incorporated into the fellowship curriculum. 59% of fellows and 61% of graduates desired hands-on POCUS training rather than didactic lectures or simulation.LimitationsLoss of respondents as program directors and fellows progressed through the survey.ConclusionsNephrology program directors, fellows, and graduates surveyed want POCUS training incorporated into the fellowship curriculum. No group felt sufficiently trained to confidently perform POCUS, and the major barrier to training was lack of sufficiently trained faculty. This highlights the need to "train the trainers" before POCUS can be fully integrated into fellowship training and regularly used in nephrology practice.

Project description:ObjectivesAssess direct versus indirect action(s) of ghrelin on hypothalamic NPY neurons.Materials and methodsElectrophysiology was used to measure ion channel activity in NPY-GFP neurons in slice preparations. Ca2+ imaging was used to monitor ghrelin activation of isolated NPY GFP-labeled neurons. Immunohistochemistry was used to localize Trpm4, SUR1 and Kir6.2 in the hypothalamus.ResultsAcylated ghrelin depolarized the membrane potential (MP) of NPY-GFP neurons in brain slices. Depolarization resulted from a decreased input resistance (IR) in ~70% of neurons (15/22) or an increased IR in the remainder (7/22), consistent with the opening or closing of ion channels, respectively. Although tetrodotoxin (TTX) blockade of presynaptic action potentials reduced ghrelin-induced changes in MP and IR, ghrelin still significantly depolarized the MP and decreased IR in TTX-treated neurons, suggesting that ghrelin directly opens cation channel(s) in NPY neurons. In isolated NPY-GFP neurons, ghrelin produced a sustained rise of [Ca2+]c, with an EC50 ~110 pM. Pharmacologic studies confirmed that the direct action of ghrelin was through occupation of the growth hormone secretagogue receptor, GHS-R, and demonstrated the importance of the adenylate cyclase/cAMP/protein kinase A (PKA) and phospholipase C/inositol triphosphate (PLC/IP3) pathways as activators of 5' AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK). Activation of isolated neurons was not affected by CNQX or TTX, but reducing [Na+]o suppressed activation, suggesting a role for Na+-permeable cation channels. SUR1 and two channel partners, Kir6.2 and Trpm4, were identified immunologically in NPY-GFP neurons in situ. The actions of SUR1 and Trpm4 modulators were informative: like ghrelin, diazoxide, a SUR1 agonist, elevated [Ca2+]c and glibenclamide, a SUR1 antagonist, partially suppressed ghrelin action, while 9-phenanthrol and flufenamic acid, selective Trpm4 antagonists, blocked ghrelin actions on isolated neurons. Ghrelin activation was unaffected by nifedipine and ω-conotoxin, inhibitors of L- and N-type Ca2+ channels, respectively, while Ni2+, mibefradil, and TTA-P2 completely or partially inhibited ghrelin action, implicating T-type Ca2+ channels. Activation was also sensitive to a spider toxin, SNX-482, at concentrations selective for R-type Ca2+ channels. Nanomolar concentrations of GABA markedly inhibited ghrelin-activation of isolated NPY-GFP neurons, consistent with chronic suppression of ghrelin action in vivo.ConclusionsNPY neurons express all the molecular machinery needed to respond directly to ghrelin. Consistent with recent studies, ghrelin stimulates presynaptic inputs that activate NPY-GFP neurons in situ. Ghrelin can also directly activate a depolarizing conductance. Results with isolated NPY-GFP neurons suggest the ghrelin-activated, depolarizing current is a Na+ conductance with the pharmacologic properties of SUR1/Trpm4 non-selective cation channels. In the isolated neuron model, the opening of SUR1/Trpm4 channels activates T- and SNX482-sensitive R-type voltage dependent Ca2+ channels, which could contribute to NPY neuronal activity in situ.

Project description:BackgroundLockdown measures applied during the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak caused a significant disturbance to hospital routine. We assessed trainees' and fellowship directors' perceptions regarding the impact of the pandemic on gastroenterology fellowship training.MethodsA web-based survey was anonymously disseminated to all Greek gastroenterology fellows and fellowship program directors. Participants completed electronically a questionnaire comprised of 5 domains that assessed participants' perception of: 1) overall impact on training; 2) impact on training in gastroenterology-specific fields (endoscopy, inflammatory bowel disease, hepatology); 3) impact on different aspects of endoscopy training; 4) impact on academic training; and 5) training perspectives for the post-pandemic era.ResultsA total of 77/128 fellows (60.1%) and 18/28 fellowship program directors (64.3%) responded. More fellows reported that the COVID-19 pandemic would have an adverse impact on fellowship training compared to their fellowship program directors (81.8% vs. 55.6%, P=0.038). This concern was mainly focused on endoscopy training (83.1% vs. 27.8%, P<0.001), with no difference regarding training in gastroenterology's other specific fields. The difference was consistent for technical skills (79.2% vs. 38.9%, P=0.001), and for the performance of basic diagnostic (70.1% vs. 22.2%, P<0.001) and emergency (48.1% vs. 11.1%, P=0.004) procedures. Fellows and fellowship program directors identified the unknown timeframe of measure implementation and the postponement of scheduled endoscopic procedures as the main factors that negatively affected training. Extension of the fellowship training program was deemed the optimal option by fellows for addressing the training decrement in the post-pandemic era, while fellowship program directors favored an increase in workload.ConclusionFellows and their fellowship program directors do not share the same concerns about the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on training programs and they propose different measures to remedy its effects.

Project description:ObjectiveStuttering is a common childhood disorder. There is limited high quality evidence regarding options for best treatment. The aim of the study was to compare the effectiveness of direct treatment with indirect treatment in preschool children who stutter.MethodsIn this multicenter randomized controlled trial with an 18 month follow-up, preschool children who stutter who were referred for treatment were randomized to direct treatment (Lidcombe Program; n = 99) or indirect treatment (RESTART-DCM treatment; n = 100). Main inclusion criteria were age 3-6 years, ≥3% syllables stuttered (%SS), and time since onset ≥6 months. The primary outcome was the percentage of non-stuttering children at 18 months. Secondary outcomes included stuttering frequency (%SS), stuttering severity ratings by the parents and therapist, severity rating by the child, health-related quality of life, emotional and behavioral problems, and speech attitude.ResultsPercentage of non-stuttering children for direct treatment was 76.5% (65/85) versus 71.4% (65/91) for indirect treatment (Odds Ratio (OR), 0.6; 95% CI, 0.1-2.4, p = .42). At 3 months, children treated by direct treatment showed a greater decline in %SS (significant interaction time x therapy: β = -1.89; t(282.82) = -2.807, p = .005). At 18 months, stuttering frequency was 1.2% (SD 2.1) for direct treatment and 1.5% (SD 2.1) for indirect treatment. Direct treatment had slightly better scores on most other secondary outcome measures, but no differences between treatment approaches were significant.ConclusionsDirect treatment decreased stuttering more quickly during the first three months of treatment. At 18 months, however, clinical outcomes for direct and indirect treatment were comparable. These results imply that at 18 months post treatment onset, both treatments are roughly equal in treating developmental stuttering in ways that surpass expectations of natural recovery. Follow-up data are needed to confirm these findings in the longer term.Trial registrationisrctn.org ISRCTN24362190.

Dataset Information

Direct versus indirect supervision of fellows covering football events: a survey of fellows and program directors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets