Procedural Competency in Academic Emergency Medicine Attending Physicians: How Is Competency Maintained and Evaluated by Academic Institutions in the US?

Introduction There have been numerous studies examining the minimum graduation requirements for resident training of procedural skills within Emergency Medicine programs; however, how academic medical centers in the United States maintain Emergency Medicine attending procedural skill competency has not been explored. Objectives The aim of this study was to examine the processes in place to evaluate and track the procedural skills practices of Emergency Medicine attending physicians at academic institutions in the US. Methods An exploratory cross-sectional survey was sent to all 39 ACGME-accredited Emergency Medicine programs in the US through a REDCap survey in 2020. Survey items inquired about the current methods in place to maintain competence on 13 procedural skills performed by Emergency Medicine providers. Results The survey response rate was 26.9%. The majority of programs did not have a process in place to evaluate procedural skills at the time of initial appointment (74.3%), and almost half of participating programs reported no formalized process during employment (51.3%). Institutions reported no minimum required number for the following procedures: dislocation reduction, intraosseous placement, lateral canthotomy, lumbar puncture, paracentesis, pericardiocentesis, thoracentesis, transvenous cardiac pacing, and tube thoracostomy. For central venous access, cricothyrotomy, endotracheal intubation, and procedural sedation, 25.6% or less of institutions had minimum annual requirements. Conclusion This study summarized the current methods in place to assess Emergency Medicine attending procedural skills at US academic institutions and demonstrated that the majority of programs lack a formalized method to assess attending procedural competency. Further research is needed to determine the value and benefit of different methods available for procedural skill competency assessment. It is believed that preventing procedural skill decay in attending physicians by a standardized process has the potential to improve patient outcomes, reduce costs and complication rates, and improve physician self-esteem, well-being, and confidence.