Moye Philip Kevin, Pesik Nicki, Terndrup Thomas, Roe Jedd, Weissman Norman, Kiefe Catarina, Houston Thomas K
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Acad Emerg Med. 2007 Mar;14(3):221-7. doi: 10.1197/j.aem.2006.10.102. Epub 2007 Jan 30.
To assess the change in prevalence of bioterrorism training among emergency medicine (EM) residencies from 1998 to 2005, to characterize current training, and to identify characteristics of programs that have implemented more intensive training methods.
This was a national cross sectional survey of the 133 U.S. EM residencies participating in the 2005 National Resident Matching Program; comparison with a baseline survey from 1998 was performed. Types of training provided were assessed, and programs using experiential methods were identified.
Of 112 programs (84.2%) responding, 98% reported formal training in bioterrorism, increased from 53% (40/76) responding in 1998. In 2005, most programs with bioterrorism training (65%) used at least three methods of instruction, mostly lectures (95%) and disaster drills (80%). Fewer programs used experiential methods such as field exercises or bioterrorism-specific rotations (35% and 13%, respectively). Compared with other programs, residency programs with more complex, experiential methods were more likely to teach bioterrorism-related topics at least twice a year (83% vs. 59%; p = 0.018), to teach at least three topics (60% vs. 40%; p = 0.02), and to report funding for bioterrorism research and education (74% vs. 45%; p = 0.007). Experiential and nonexperiential programs were similar in program type (university or nonuniversity), length of program, number of residents, geographic location, and urban or rural setting.
Training of EM residents in bioterrorism preparedness has increased markedly since 1998. However, training is often of low intensity, relying mainly on nonexperiential instruction such as lectures. Although current recommendations are that training in bioterrorism include experiential learning experiences, the authors found the rate of these experiences to be low.
评估1998年至2005年间急诊医学（EM）住院医师培训项目中生物恐怖主义培训的普及率变化，描述当前的培训情况，并确定采用更强化培训方法的项目特征。
这是一项对参与2005年全国住院医师匹配项目的133个美国急诊医学住院医师培训项目进行的全国横断面调查；并与1998年的基线调查进行比较。评估了所提供的培训类型，并确定了采用体验式方法的项目。
在112个做出回应的项目（84.2%）中，98%报告有生物恐怖主义方面的正规培训，高于1998年做出回应的53%（40/76）。2005年，大多数接受生物恐怖主义培训的项目（65%）至少使用三种教学方法，主要是讲座（95%）和灾难演练（80%）。较少的项目采用体验式方法，如实地演习或生物恐怖主义专项轮转（分别为35%和13%）。与其他项目相比，采用更复杂体验式方法的住院医师培训项目更有可能每年至少讲授两次生物恐怖主义相关主题（83%对59%；p = 0.018），讲授至少三个主题（60%对40%；p = 0.02），并报告有生物恐怖主义研究和教育资金（74%对45%；p = 0.007）。体验式和非体验式项目在项目类型（大学或非大学）、项目时长、住院医师人数、地理位置以及城市或农村环境方面相似。
自1998年以来，急诊医学住院医师在生物恐怖主义防范方面的培训显著增加。然而，培训强度往往较低，主要依赖讲座等非体验式教学。尽管目前的建议是生物恐怖主义培训应包括体验式学习经历，但作者发现这些经历的比例较低。
