From the Division of Emergency Medicine (C.F., K.W.), Department of Medicine, Western University, London; Department of Emergency Medicine (E.R., A.S., A.K.H.), Queen's University, Kingston; Department of Emergency Medicine (T.M.), University of Manitoba, Winnipeg; Division of Emergency Medicine (A.P.), Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Ontario; Department of Emergency Medicine (B.T.), University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan; Division of Emergency Medicine (K.C.), Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton; Department of Emergency Medicine (G.M.), University of Ottawa, Ottawa; Department of Emergency Medicine (T.C.), Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario; Department of Emergency Medicine (J.H.), University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta; and Department of Emergency Medicine (C.D.), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Simul Healthc. 2021 Aug 1;16(4):246-253. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000482.
Simulation is becoming a popular educational modality for physician continuing professional development (CPD). This study sought to characterize how simulation-based CPD (SBCPD) is being used in Canada and what academic emergency physicians (AEPs) desire in an SBCPD program.
Two national surveys were conducted from March to June 2018. First, the SBCPD Needs Assessment Survey was administered online to all full-time AEPs across 9 Canadian academic emergency medicine (EM) sites. Second, the SBCPD Status Survey was administered by telephone to the department representatives (DRs)-simulation directors or equivalent-at 20 Canadian academic EM sites.
Response rates for the SBCPD Needs Assessment and the SBCPD Status Survey were 40% (252/635) and 100% (20/20) respectively. Sixty percent of Canadian academic EM sites reported using SBCPD, although only 30% reported dedicated funding support. Academic emergency physician responses demonstrated a median annual SBCPD of 3 hours. Reported incentivization for SBCPD participation varied with AEPs reporting less incentivization than DRs. Academic emergency physicians identified time commitments outside of shift, lack of opportunities, and lack of departmental funding as their top barriers to participation, whereas DRs thought AEPs fear of peer judgment and inexperience with simulation were substantial barriers. Content areas of interest for SBCPD were as follows: rare procedures, pediatric resuscitation, and neonatal resuscitation. Lastly, interprofessional involvement in SBCPD was valued by both DRs and AEPs.
Simulation-based CPD programs are becoming common in Canadian academic EM sites. Our findings will guide program coordinators in addressing barriers to participation, selecting content, and determining the frequency of SBCPD events.
模拟正成为医生继续教育（CPD）的一种流行教育模式。本研究旨在描述加拿大如何使用基于模拟的 CPD（SBCPD），以及学术急诊医师（AEP）对 SBCPD 项目的期望。
2018 年 3 月至 6 月进行了两项全国性调查。首先，向 9 个加拿大学术急诊医学（EM）站点的所有全职 AEP 在线进行 SBCPD 需求评估调查。其次，在 20 个加拿大学术 EM 站点，通过电话向部门代表（DR）-模拟主任或同等人员进行 SBCPD 状况调查。
SBCPD 需求评估和 SBCPD 状况调查的回复率分别为 40%（252/635）和 100%（20/20）。60%的加拿大学术 EM 站点报告使用 SBCPD，尽管只有 30%报告有专门的资金支持。AEP 的报告显示，每年的 SBCPD 中位数为 3 小时。报告的 SBCPD 参与激励措施因 AEP 比 DR 报告的激励措施少而有所不同。AEP 认为参与的主要障碍是轮班外的时间承诺、机会不足和部门资金不足，而 DR 认为 AEP 对同行评判的恐惧和对模拟的不熟悉是实质性障碍。SBCPD 感兴趣的内容领域如下：罕见程序、儿科复苏和新生儿复苏。最后，DR 和 AEP 都重视 SBCPD 中的跨专业参与。
基于模拟的 CPD 计划在加拿大学术 EM 站点变得越来越普遍。我们的研究结果将指导计划协调员解决参与障碍、选择内容以及确定 SBCPD 事件的频率。
