Division of Neurocritical Care and Emergency Neurology, Departments of Emergency Medicine and Neurology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.
Department of Critical Care Services, Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME.
Crit Care Med. 2018 Feb;46(2):307-315. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002876.
This manuscript describes the state of neurocritical care fellowship training, compares its written standards to those of other critical care fellowship programs, and discusses how programmatic oversight by the United Council for Neurological Subspecialties should evolve to meet American College of Graduate Medical Education standards. This review is a work product of the Society of Critical Care Medicine Neuroscience section and was reviewed and approved by the Council of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.
We evaluated the published training criteria and requirements of American College of Graduate Medical Education Critical Care subspecialty fellowships programs of Internal Medicine, Surgery, and Anesthesia and compared them with the training criteria and required competencies for neurocritical care.
We have reviewed the published training standards from American College of Graduate Medical Education as well as the United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties subspecialty training documents and clarified the definition and responsibilities of an intensivist with reference to the Leapfrog Group, the National Quality Forum, and the Joint Commission.
No data at present exist to test the concept of similarity across specialty fellowship critical care training programs.
Neurocritical care training differs in its exposure to clinical entities that are directly associated to other critical care subspecialties. However, the core critical care knowledge, procedural skills, and competencies standards for neurocritical care appears to be similar with some important differences compared with American College of Graduate Medical Education critical care training programs.
The United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties has developed a directed program development strategy to emulate American College of Graduate Medical Education standards with the goal to have standards that are similar or identical to American College of Graduate Medical Education standards.
本文描述了神经危重症监护培训的现状，将其书面标准与其他重症监护培训计划进行了比较，并讨论了美国神经科医师协会理事会应如何发展以满足美国研究生医学教育标准。本综述是重症监护医学神经科学分会的工作成果，经重症监护医学学会理事会审查和批准。
我们评估了美国研究生医学教育内科、外科和麻醉Critical Care 亚专科培训计划的已发表培训标准和要求，并将其与神经危重症监护的培训标准和所需能力进行了比较。
我们已经审查了美国研究生医学教育协会以及美国神经科医师协会理事会的专科培训文件，并参考了 Leapfrog Group、国家质量论坛和联合委员会，明确了强化治疗医师的定义和职责。
目前尚无数据可用于测试各专业重症监护培训计划之间相似性的概念。
神经危重症培训在与其他重症监护亚专科直接相关的临床实体方面存在差异。然而，神经危重症的核心重症监护知识、程序技能和能力标准似乎与美国研究生医学教育重症监护培训计划相似，但也存在一些重要差异。
美国神经科医师协会理事会制定了一项定向计划发展战略，以效仿美国研究生医学教育标准，目标是使标准与美国研究生医学教育标准相似或相同。
