Premium
A Comparison of Australasian and United States Emergency Medicine Training Programs **
Author(s) -
Taylor David McD.,
Jelinek George A.
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
academic emergency medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.221
H-Index - 124
eISSN - 1553-2712
pISSN - 1069-6563
DOI - 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1999.tb00396.x
Subject(s) - accreditation , medicine , curriculum , documentation , medical education , variety (cybernetics) , training (meteorology) , psychology , pedagogy , physics , artificial intelligence , meteorology , computer science , programming language
. Training programs in emergency medicine differ from country to country. This article compares the allopathic training programs of Australasia and the United States. The perceived advantages of these programs are highlighted, but no attempt is made to determine which is the better program. The Australasian program is significantly longer and places a greater emphasis on the basic clinical sciences, physical examination skills, and academic output. Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM) regulations are relatively flexible and allow trainees to design their own programs. Trainees are encouraged to arrange accredited positions in a variety of hospitals. Overseas and part‐time training may be acceptable. In the United States, trainees rotate within and from one parent institution, which provides a rigid teaching structure for a “critical mass” of trainees, based on a “core” curriculum. Rotations tend to be much shorter but ensure exposure to a broader range of clinical experience. Evaluation of trainees and teaching faculty is more frequent and documentation of procedural and resuscitation skills is required. Trainees are under the close supervision of teaching faculty at all times when working in an ED.