BACKGROUND: Women remain underrepresented in leadership roles, faculty roles, and among residents in orthopaedic surgery. It has been suggested that having women in leadership positions in orthopaedic surgery may help to increase the gender diversity of residency programs. However, to our knowledge, no study has explored the relationship, if any, between the gender of the residency program director and the percentage of women in the residency program.
OBJECTIVE: (1) Is the program director\'s gender associated with differences in the percentage of women orthopaedic surgery residents? (2) Do women and men differ in the time to appointment of program director?
METHODS: A list of 207 orthopaedic surgery residencies was obtained from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) website for the academic year 2021 to 2022. The study excluded 6% (13) of programs; 4% (8) were those without ACGME accreditation and those with initial accreditation, and 2% (5) did not have updated 2021 to 2022 resident lists. Descriptive information on 194 programs was obtained from publicly accessible resources from July 2021 through July 2022. The institution\'s website and the American Medical Association\'s (AMA) Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA) was used to collect residency program characteristics and resident demographics [ 2 ]. Doximity, Healthgrades, and LinkedIn were used to further collect current orthopaedic surgery residency program director demographics, including gender, age, and education/training history. To determine gender, photographs and pronouns (she/her/hers or he/him/hers) used in their biographies were used first. To confirm this, secondary sources were used including their NPI profile, which lists gender; Doximity; and their LinkedIn profile. Scopus was used to analyze research output by the program directors-using the Hirsch index (h-index) as the primary bibliometric metric. A total of 194 program directors were identified, of whom of 12% (23) were women and 88% (171) were men. Of the 4421 total residents among these programs, 20% (887) were women and 80% (3534) were men. A univariate analysis comparing program directors was conducted, with continuous variables analyzed using an independent-sample t-test and categorical variables analyzed using a Pearson chi-square test. With the numbers available, a post hoc statistical power calculation indicated that we could detect an 32% difference in the percentage of women in a program as significant with 80% power at the p < 0.05 level, whereas we might have been underpowered to discern smaller differences than that.
RESULTS: With the numbers available, we found no difference in the percentage of women in residency programs run by women program directors than in programs in which the program director was a man (22% [125 of 558] versus 20% [762 of 3863], mean difference 2% [95% CI -1.24% to 7.58%]; p = 0.08). Comparing women to men program directors, women had fewer years between residency completion and appointment to the position of program director (8 ± 2 years versus 12 ± 7 years, mean difference 4 years [95% CI 2.01 to 7.93 years]; p = 0.02) and had a lower mean h-index (7 ± 4 versus 11 ± 11, mean difference 4 [95% CI 1.70 to 6.56]; p = 0.03) and number of publications (24 ± 23 versus 41 ± 62, mean difference 17 [95% CI 3.98 to 31.05]; p = 0.01), although they did not differ in terms of their advanced degrees, duration of training, or likelihood of having taken a fellowship.
CONCLUSIONS: Orthopaedic residency programs that were run by women did not contain a higher percentage of women residents, suggesting that the gender of the individual in that role may not be as important as has been speculated by others. Future studies should investigate the intersectionality of gender, race, and ethnicity of residents, program directors, and current faculty.
CONCLUSIONS: The fact that women were placed in program director roles earlier in career may also carry special jeopardy for them. Those roles are difficult and can impair a faculty member\'s ability to conduct individual research, which often is key to further academic promotions. Given that and the fact that the gender of the program director was not associated with differences in gender composition of residency programs, we believe that increasing mentorship and access to pipeline programs will help promote diversity in residency programs.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how Chief Medical Officers experience their role in the municipalities´ work with making the public health overview documents, demanded by the Norwegian Public Health Act from 2012.
METHODS: A qualitative study with semi-structured focus group interviews with 21 Chief Medical Officers from 20 different municipalities in Norway. The interviews were conducted in 2017. The data were analyzed thematically.
RESULTS: The Chief Medical Officers were mainly positive to participating in making public health overview documents. They took on roles as leaders of the work, medical advisors, data collectors towards local GPs and listening post to other sectors. Organizational factors like too small positions and a lack of tradition to involve the CMO in public health work were experienced as barriers to their involvement. The collaboration with the public health coordinators was said to be rewarding, and the intersectoral process involved employees from other sectors in a new way in public health. Although there were some positive experiences, several CMOs considered the use and impact of the public health overview document as limited.
CONCLUSIONS: There was a large variation in the amount and the type of involvement the Chief Medical Officers had in making the public health overview documents in Norwegian municipalities. More research is needed to understand if this has any consequences for the quality of public health work in the municipalities and whether it is a sign of a changing role of the Chief Medical Officers.

OBJECTIVE: Insufficient evidence-based recommendations to guide care for patients with devastating brain injuries (DBIs) leave patients vulnerable to inconsistent practice at the emergency department (ED) and intensive care unit (ICU) interface. We sought to characterize the beliefs of Canadian emergency medicine (EM) and critical care medicine (CCM) physician site directors regarding current management practices for patients with DBI.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of EM and CCM physician directors of adult EDs and ICUs across Canada (December 2022 to March 2023). Our primary outcome was the proportion of respondents who manage (or consult on) patients with DBI in the ED. We conducted subgroup analyses to compare beliefs of EM and CCM physicians.
RESULTS: Of 303 eligible respondents, we received 98 (32%) completed surveys (EM physician directors, 46; CCM physician directors, 52). Most physician directors reported participating in the decision to withdraw life-sustaining measures (WLSM) for patients with DBI in the ED (80%, n = 78), but 63% of these (n = 62) said this was infrequent. Physician directors reported that existing neuroprognostication methods are rarely sufficient to support WLSM in the ED (49%, n = 48) and believed that an ICU stay is required to improve confidence (99%, n = 97). Most (96%, n = 94) felt that providing caregiver visitation time prior to WLSM was a valid reason for ICU admission.
CONCLUSIONS: In our survey of Canadian EM and CCM physician directors, 80% participated in WLSM in the ED for patients with DBI. Despite this, most supported ICU admission to optimize neuroprognostication and patient-centred end-of-life care, including organ donation.
RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: L’insuffisance des recommandations fondées sur des données probantes pour guider les soins aux individus atteints de lésions cérébrales dévastatrices rend ces personnes vulnérables à des pratiques incohérentes à la jonction entre le service des urgences et de l’unité de soins intensifs (USI). Nous avons cherché à caractériser les croyances des directeurs médicaux canadiens en médecine d’urgence et médecine de soins intensifs concernant les pratiques de prise en charge actuelles des personnes ayant subi une lésion cérébrale dévastatrice. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé un sondage transversal auprès des directeurs médicaux des urgences et des unités de soins intensifs pour adultes du Canada (décembre 2022 à mars 2023). Notre critère d’évaluation principal était la proportion de répondant·es qui prennent en charge (ou jouent un rôle de consultation auprès) des personnes atteintes de lésions cérébrales dévastatrices à l’urgence. Nous avons effectué des analyses en sous-groupes pour comparer les croyances des médecins des urgences et des soins intensifs. RéSULTATS: Sur les 303 personnes répondantes admissibles, 98 (32 %) ont répondu aux sondages (directions médicales des urgences, 46; directions médicales d’USI, 52). La plupart des directeurs médicaux ont déclaré avoir participé à la décision de retirer des traitements de maintien des fonctions vitales (TFMV) pour des patient·es atteint·es de lésions cérébrales dévastatrices à l’urgence (80 %, n = 78), mais 63 % (n = 62) ont déclaré que c’était peu fréquent. Les directions médicales ont indiqué que les méthodes de neuropronostic existantes sont rarement suffisantes pour appuyer le retrait des TMFV à l’urgence (49 %, n = 48) et croyaient qu’un séjour aux soins intensifs était nécessaire pour améliorer leur confiance en ces méthodes (99 %, n = 97). La plupart (96 %, n = 94) estimaient que le fait d’offrir du temps de visite aux personnes soignantes avant le retrait des TMFV était un motif valable d’admission aux soins intensifs. CONCLUSION: Dans le cadre de notre sondage mené auprès des directions médicales des services d’urgence et des USI au Canada, 80 % d’entre elles ont participé au retrait de TMFV à l’urgence pour des patient·es souffrant de lésions cérébrales dévastatrices. Malgré cela, la plupart d’entre elles étaient en faveur d’une admission aux soins intensifs afin d’optimiser le neuropronostic et les soins de fin de vie axés sur les patient·es, y compris le don d’organes.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Institutional Graduate Medical Education (GME) Well-being Director (WBD) roles have recently emerged in the United States to support resident and fellow well-being. However, with a standard position description lacking, the current scope and responsibilities of such roles is unknown. This study describes the scope of work, salary support, and opportunities for role definition for those holding institutional leadership positions for GME well-being.
METHODS: In November 2021, 43 members of a national network of GME WBDs in the United States were invited to complete a cross-sectional survey that included questions about job responsibilities, percent effort, and dedicated budget, and a free text response question about unique leadership challenges for GME WBDs. The survey was analyzed using descriptive statistics for quantitative data and thematic analysis for qualitative data.
RESULTS: 26 members (60%) responded. Most were physicians, and the majority identified as female and White. Median percent effort salary support was 40%. A small minority reported overseeing an allocated budget. Most respondents worked to improve access to mental health services, oversaw institution-wide well-being programs, designed or delivered well-being content, provided consultations to individual programs, met with trainees, and partnered with diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts. GME WBDs described unique challenges that had implications for perceived effectiveness related to resources, culture, institutional structure, and regulatory requirements in GME.
CONCLUSIONS: There was high concordance for several key responsibilities, which may represent a set of core priorities for this role. Other reported responsibilities may reflect institution-specific needs or opportunities for role definition. A wide scope of responsibilities, coupled with limited defined budgetary support described by many GME Well-being Directors, could limit effective role execution. Future efforts to better define the role, optimize organizational reporting structures and provide funding commensurate with the scope of work may allow the GME Well-being Director to more effectively develop and execute strategic interventions.

Emergency departments (EDs) are the primary source of health care for many patients diagnosed with sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Expedited partner therapy (EPT), treating the partner of patients with STIs, is an evidence-based practice for patients who might not otherwise seek care. Little is known about the use of EPT in the ED. In a national survey, we describe ED medical directors\' knowledge, attitudes, and practices of EPT.
A cross-sectional survey of medical directors from academic EDs was conducted from July to September 2020 using the Academy of Academic Administrators of Emergency Medicine Benchmarking Group. Primary outcomes were EPT awareness, support, and use. The survey also examined barriers and facilitators.
Forty-eight of 70 medical directors (69%) responded. Seventy-three percent were aware of EPT, but fewer knew how to prescribe it (38%), and only 19% of EDs had implemented EPT. Seventy-nine percent supported EPT and were more likely to if they were aware of EPT (89% vs. 54%; P = 0.01). Of nonimplementers, 41% thought EPT was feasible, and 56% thought departmental support would be likely. Emergency department directors were most concerned about legal liability, but a large proportion (44%) viewed preventing sequelae of untreated STIs as \"extremely important.\"
Emergency department medical directors expressed strong support for EPT and reasonable levels of feasibility for implementation but low utilization. Our findings highlight the need to identify mechanisms for EPT implementation in EDs.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of acute pain is an essential element of pre-hospital care for injured and critically ill patients. Clinical studies indicate the need for improvement in the prehospital analgesia.
The aim of this study is to assess the current situation in out of hospital pain management in Germany regarding the substances, indications, dosage and the delegation of the use of analgesics to emergency medical service (EMS) staff.
A standardized survey of the medical directors of the emergency services (MDES) in Germany was carried out using an online questionnaire. The anonymous results were evaluated using the statistical software SPSS (Chi-squared test, Mann-Whitney-U test).
Seventy-seven MDES responsible for 989 rescue stations and 397 EMS- physician bases in 15 federal states took part in this survey. Morphine (98.7%), Fentanyl (85.7%), Piritramide (61%), Sufentanil (18.2%) and Nalbuphine (14,3%) are provided as opioid analgesics. The non-opioid analgesics (NOA) including Ketamine/Esketamine (98,7%), Metamizole (88.3%), Paracetamol (66,2%), Ibuprofen (24,7%) and COX-2-inhibitors (7,8%) are most commonly available. The antispasmodic Butylscopolamine is available (81,8%) to most rescue stations. Fentanyl is the most commonly provided opioid analgesic for treatment of a traumatic pain (70.1%) and back pain (46.8%), Morphine for visceral colic-like (33.8%) and non-colic pain (53.2%). In cases of acute coronary syndrome is Morphine (85.7%) the leading analgesic substance. Among the non-opioid analgesics is Ketamine/Esketamine (90.9%) most frequently provided to treat traumatic pain, Metamizole for visceral colic-like (70.1%) and non-colic (68.6%) as well as back pain (41.6%). Butylscopolamine is the second most frequently provided medication after Metamizole for \"visceral colic-like pain\" (55.8%). EMS staff (with or without a request for presence of the EMS physician on site) are permitted to use the following: Morphine (16.9%), Piritramide (13.0%) and Nalbuphine (10.4%), and of NOAs for (Es)Ketamine (74.1%), Paracetamol (53.3%) and Metamizole (35.1%). The dosages of the most important and commonly provided analgesic substances permitted to independent treatment by the paramedics are often below the recommended range for adults (RDE). The majority of medical directors (78.4%) of the emergency services consider the independent application of analgesics by paramedics sensible. The reason for the relatively rare authorization of opioids for use by paramedics is mainly due to legal (in)certainty (53.2%).
Effective analgesics are available for EMS staff in Germany, the approach to improvement lies in the area of application. For this purpose, the adaptations of the legal framework as well as the creation of a guideline for prehospital analgesia are useful.

Within medical education, feedback is an invaluable tool to facilitate learning and growth throughout a physician\'s training and beyond. Despite the importance of feedback, variations in practice indicate the need for evidence-based guidelines to inform best practices. Additionally, time constraints, variable acuity, and workflow in the emergency department (ED) pose unique challenges to providing effective feedback. This paper outlines expert guidelines for feedback in the ED setting from members of the Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine Best Practices Subcommittee, based on the best evidence available through a critical review of the literature. We provide guidance on the use of feedback in medical education, with a focus on instructor strategies for giving feedback and learner strategies for receiving feedback, and we offer suggestions for fostering a culture of feedback.

This study aimed to describe emergency medical services (EMS) managers\' and medical directors\' perceptions of collaborating with patients concerning patient safety issues in the EMS.
The study used a descriptive qualitative approach. Five focus groups and two individuals were interviewed using a semi-structured guide with open-ended questions. The data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research was used to guide the reporting of this study.
EMS organisations from Finland\'s five healthcare districts.
EMS medical directors (n=5) and EMS managers (n=14). Purposive sampling was used.
Two main themes, \'Patient safety considered an organisational responsibility\' and \'EMS patients\' opportunities and obstacles to speaking up\', were generated from the data. Under the main theme, \'Patient safety considered an organisational responsibility\', were three subthemes: patient safety considered part of the quality in EMS, system-level models for handling and observing patient safety in EMS, and management\'s ability to find a balance when using patients\' feedback for patient safety development. Under the other main theme were four subthemes: \'social and feedback skills of EMS personnel and management\', \'managements\' assumptions of patients\' reasons for not speaking up\', \'EMS organisations\' different but unsystematic ways of collecting feedback\' and \'management\'s openness to develop patient participation\'.
The nature of the EMS organisations and EMS assignments could affect a patient\'s participation in developing patient safety in EMS. However, EMS managers and medical directors are receptive to collaborating with patients concerning patient safety issues if they have sufficient resources and a coherent way to collect patient safety concerns. The management is open to collaborating with patients, but there is a need to develop a systematic method with enough resources to facilitate the management\'s collaborating with patients.