Uniformity of EM training?

[Iron Horse]

People on this forum frequently state that all EM residency programs are basically on par because of strict oversight by the accrediting body. Then by implication, other specialites' residency programs do not have comparably strict oversight by their respective accrediting body and this leads to variance in quality of training. Is this truly the case? It just seems hard to believe.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[tonem]

I don't think it implies that at all. In fact, the same organization Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) oversees the Residency Review Committees for every medical specialty. Parity is probably the case in most of them. In the more established specialties (EM is relatively young) there has been more time for various programs to find there niche. Some programs are geared to training future departments heads and others are geared towards training community physicians. In every specialty subpar programs lose accreditation or go on probation all the time. Because there are still relatively few residency programs in EM, fewer lose accreditation etc.... but it does happen here too.

Second, the vast majority of people posting in the EM forum only interviewed at EM programs so we have very little first had knowledge of the quality of programs in other specialties.

 

[DrQuinn]

Believe it brother. Atleast that's what I have been told from lots of attendings, residents, and fellow students. A lot of the PDs on my interviews (some at community programs, some big name EM programs) told me that it really came down to a personal choice of where you wanted to do residency, that no matter where you went, you'd be trained about the same.

Now at residency A you may do 1000 chest tubes, whereas in B you may do only 50... but do you think after a point it really matters?

Q