IM or Ed, hmm maybe both

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

IMEMhmm

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Ok I am a med student in his clerkship years. I am interested in medicine, but where to go is the question. I enjoy IM very much, but there seems to be few procedures 🙁 EM is great, but it seems to be a GP who can handle trauma. I respect FP's, so please do not take offense.

So why EM over IM, or why not EM/IM. I've been told this combo doesn't allow you to excell in either....

I guess I would like to hear your opinion about your choice of field; IM, EM, IM/ED thanks and enjoy the rest of labor day folks.
 
Ok I am a med student in his clerkship years. I am interested in medicine, but where to go is the question. I enjoy IM very much, but there seems to be few procedures 🙁 EM is great, but it seems to be a GP who can handle trauma. I respect FP's, so please do not take offense.

So why EM over IM, or why not EM/IM. I've been told this combo doesn't allow you to excell in either....

I guess I would like to hear your opinion about your choice of field; IM, EM, IM/ED thanks and enjoy the rest of labor day folks.

You have to decide what you want to do. Planning on doing ED for awhile and them switching to IM doesn't realistically work. Trying a combination of internal medicine and emergency medicine can be very difficult as that places the physician across departments. If there aren't spots for this already, it can be difficult to create (especially outside of a unified group model).

A person chooses EM/IM because they are interested in the academics of the subjects. EM/IM trained physicians are extremely well trained and are often research focused. The EM/IM trained physicians are attempting to be leaders in both fields and may try to use aspects from each to further both. Again, research, research, research. They are often more well versed in either subject then their peers in either specialty. Some do go on to fellowships, especially critical care.

Others, such as KGUNNER and SuperWiz can probably give you an even better outline as to why someone would choose the EM/IM route. I am also quite certain there are few previous threads (perhaps even a FAQ) that address this as well.

With respect to "GP who can handle trauma," I think you'll find in any modern ED that the skill set of an EP overlaps, but is quite different than a FP trained physician. I am far more comfortable dealing with presentations such as acute neurologic emergencies or abdominal emergencies, than your average FP. By the same token, I'm not competent in anyway to manage many chronic medical conditions.
 
I would suggest you do an additional elective in both EM and IM to help you decide. These are really very different areas of medicine. The thought process is different as are the entire atmospheres in which you practice. EM---what is happening right now and what needs to be done immediately, what is going to kill this patient, what diagnoses can I not miss, are they going home or coming in.....IM---What is the long list of potential diagnoses, how over the next few months can we figure out what this is. Remember with IM you have many other options via fellowship..cards/gi/renal/critical care/inpt vs outpt. With EM you can also do a critical care fellowship which brings you a bit closer to IM. I don't think you gain a lot doing EM/IM other than a larger knowledge base (which is helpful, but isn't necessary to practice either), unless you truly want to split your time between 1/2 IM and 1/2 EM. And if you really wanted that you could do EM/critical care fellowship. When you do a combined EM/IM you are obligating yourself to many years of training versus doing EM then having the option to add on extra fellowship years if you are still not getting enough IM/critical care exposure. If you did IM and really found you still liked EM, you could always do another residency and it would only be 6 years total versus 5 if you did combined to start with. I recommend you get some more experience and really figure out what you like about each area of medicine. If procedures are the only things you like about EM, you can find plenty of this in IM (ICU medicine--lined, intubations, bronchs, etc; cards with interventional stuff/echos; GI with scopes). Sorry this is a little bit of rambling, hope it helps you.
 
Ok I am a med student in his clerkship years. I am interested in medicine, but where to go is the question. I enjoy IM very much, but there seems to be few procedures 🙁 EM is great, but it seems to be a GP who can handle trauma. I respect FP's, so please do not take offense.

So why EM over IM, or why not EM/IM. I've been told this combo doesn't allow you to excell in either....

I guess I would like to hear your opinion about your choice of field; IM, EM, IM/ED thanks and enjoy the rest of labor day folks.

If you enjoy IM you should do it. EM is not at all about procedures. I spend only a fraction of each shift doing "procedures", while the vast majority is just treating patients. If you want to do procedures go into surgery or interventional radiology.
 
To echo the other posters, EM is not anything like 'GP who can handle trauma'. There really isn't a lot of overlap in my opinion. We are trained and expected to manage medical emergencies with much more efficiency than a GP while at the same time managing emergencies from Ob/Gyn, Peds, Surgical, Urologic, Neurologic, Orthopedic, Neurosurgical, Cardiac, GI, Derm, Hem/Onc, Radiologic, Pathologic etc (ok, maybe not those last two) but you get the idea. Others have tried to apply the old FM adage of "knowledge base as wide as an ocean, but only an inch deep" to EM, but I think a better description would be that EM is 'the second best at everything'.
 
To echo the other posters, EM is not anything like 'GP who can handle trauma'. There really isn't a lot of overlap in my opinion. We are trained and expected to manage medical emergencies with much more efficiency than a GP while at the same time managing emergencies from Ob/Gyn, Peds, Surgical, Urologic, Neurologic, Orthopedic, Neurosurgical, Cardiac, GI, Derm, Hem/Onc, Radiologic, Pathologic etc (ok, maybe not those last two) but you get the idea. Others have tried to apply the old FM adage of "knowledge base as wide as an ocean, but only an inch deep" to EM, but I think a better description would be that EM is 'the second best at everything'.

derm emergencies hahaha...yeah ok there are a few...
 
So why EM over IM, or why not EM/IM. I've been told this combo doesn't allow you to excell in either....

I guess I would like to hear your opinion about your choice of field; IM, EM, IM/ED thanks and enjoy the rest of labor day folks.

EM/IM is primarily intended for people looking to do something beyond EM practice - academic EM, research, critical care, leadership, etc. It is not intended to make you a "better EM practitioner."

EM and IM are very different fields. I agree with the poster(s) above - do electives in each, talk to EM people and IM people, to your student advisor, and to some EM/IM people to get a better idea on what route to take.
 
EM doctors are masters of resuscitation.
IM doctors are experts at management.

I like both, and love being in an EM/IM program. What is important is to follow what you like.
 
EM doctors are masters of resuscitation.
IM doctors are experts at management.

I like both, and love being in an EM/IM program. What is important is to follow what you like.

A lot of IM training is an utter waste if your primary job is EM. On my hyponatremics, I don't sit and caculate TBW and sodium infusion over 8 hours, because simply I'm not going to be managing them for 8 hours.

Likwise with optimizing blood pressure, glucose, cholesterol, etc, we just don't do it in the ED.
 
A lot of IM training is an utter waste if your primary job is EM. On my hyponatremics, I don't sit and caculate TBW and sodium infusion over 8 hours, because simply I'm not going to be managing them for 8 hours.

There are many rotations, even in a "straight" EM program, that seem impractical for a future EM practice. One way to look at these is to assume that perhaps, someday, some specific aspect of that experience may prove useful. Even if that seems unlikely, it's always a good idea to know what goes on in the world of our consultants. Speaking their language, and understanding their limitations is very important in our practice where we may call on them to help our patients.

As for hyponatremia, I'm sure your IM colleagues will appreciate it greatly if you started the patient on the correct infusion rate. They gain respect for EM as a specialty and you as a practitioner, and it's better for the patient.
 
I truly appreciate everyone's feedback. My apologies for the EM/FP comment, it was an off the cuff comment by a physician. I'll be more careful with reiterating such comments in the future.

I will just take one rotation at a time, study and work hard, learn as much medicine I can, and take inventory in January. That will give me at least 6 rotations to get a feel if I enjoy acute care vs chronic care, which it seems to be the difference between EM and IM. I also see that EM/IM or would lead to a more academic or leadership path. Thank you for clarifying this.

Thanks again folks,
btw, I began ob/gyn pray for me! 🙂
 
There are many rotations, even in a "straight" EM program, that seem impractical for a future EM practice. One way to look at these is to assume that perhaps, someday, some specific aspect of that experience may prove useful. Even if that seems unlikely, it's always a good idea to know what goes on in the world of our consultants. Speaking their language, and understanding their limitations is very important in our practice where we may call on them to help our patients.

As for hyponatremia, I'm sure your IM colleagues will appreciate it greatly if you started the patient on the correct infusion rate. They gain respect for EM as a specialty and you as a practitioner, and it's better for the patient.

The huge majority of the time, the initial management is 500-1000 ml NS over an hour. If someone is altered (on the point of getting intubated because they are so gorked), or seizing, you can't go wrong with 1-2 cc/kg of 3% NS over the first hour, and let the admitting doctor decide what to do once they get follow-up labs. In 8 years of medical experience, I've only seen 3% normal saline given once. I can honestly say, that I've never had a patient where it was critical to figure out all of this data in the ED.

As an ER doctor, probably the worst thing you could do is correct the sodium too fast. In my opinion, not only are we not the best people to manage the hyponatremia over the next 8 hours, it is also not in the patient's best interest to have us dedicating 15 minutes of our day, looking up formulas, and calculating down to the last cc, exactly how much sodium they should get for the next 8 hours, 24 hours, etc. When in doubt, in a stable hyponatremic patient, we should err on the side of doing less. Lets face it, whatever number we come up with, the admitting doctor will disagree and change the order.

Admitting doctors will never give us respect because most of them are jerks, and they aren't grateful to their own mothers for bringing them into this world, let alone for the ER doctor to correctly calculating the correct sodium replacement in a hyponatremic patient.

Every minute that I spend calculating sodium replacement is a minute taken away from the other patients waiting in the ED, with chest pain, abdominal pain, weakness, and headaches, and lacerations waiting to get repaired. The last thing on my mind is "impressing IM doctors" with my ability to do their job. I'd rather focus on clearing out the waiting room, and getting my charting done.
 
Top