Analysis of junior doctor supervision in Australasian emergency departments.

BACKGROUND

Supervision of junior doctors in ED is vital but limited literature exists on how it is provided.

OBJECTIVE

To assess Australasian ED supervision and review regional legislature supervision requirements.

METHODS

Between December 2008 and June 2009 emails containing a link to a cross-sectional survey were sent to Directors of Emergency Medicine Training in all Australasian ED accredited for advanced training. Non-responding ED were subsequently contacted by telephone or email. Regional legislature supervision requirements were obtained from postgraduate medical councils.

RESULTS

A total of 103 (98.1%) of 105 ED participated. Senior review in person was mandatory in 43.2% of ED for patients of PGY1 (postgraduate year 1 doctors) and 6.1% of ED for patients of PGY2 (P < 0.001). Of ED without mandatory review, 13% had written guidelines detailing which patients required review. When ED consultants were on-site, they most commonly provided supervision in 60.2% of ED and shared supervision equally with registrars in 35.7% of ED; when consultants were off-site registrars most commonly provided supervision in 87.6% of ED. Fewer major regional/rural base hospitals had 24 h PGY3 or above supervision than major referral and urban district hospitals (82.6% vs 100% and 100%, P < 0.01). Regional legislature requirements varied with no universal guidelines.

CONCLUSION

There are significant differences between supervision requirements for PGY1 and PGY2. A minority of ED in Australasia do not have 24 h supervision by PGY3 or higher. Few ED have written guidelines for supervising PGY1 and PGY2. The majority of registrar supervision occurs without consultant oversight. Legislature requirements for supervision in ED are variable between regions.