Register for email alerts and news feeds:
This journal | BMJ Group
rss
Emergency Medicine Journal 2009;26:706-710; doi:10.1136/emj.2008.066977
© 2009 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and the College of Emergency Medicine.

ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Perception of emergency medicine by consultants and specialist registrars from other hospital specialties

S Reid1, D Stephenson2, L Bowden2

1 South Yorkshire and South Humber Deanery, Sheffield, UK
2 The Rotherham Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Rotherham, UK

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to Dr S Reid, Accident and Emergency Department, Northern General Hospital, Herries Road, Sheffield S5 7AU, UK; stureid60{at}hotmail.com

Background: This is the first study to consider feedback on the specialty of emergency medicine (EM) given by other hospital specialties.

Method: A questionnaire was sent to 100 randomly selected consultants and specialist registrars from other specialties in a district general hospital in Northern England. The response rate was 67%.

Results: 80% of respondents felt that the official term for the specialty should be "accident and emergency medicine". Resuscitation and major trauma were given the highest importance scores (>9/10) when evaluating the purpose of EM and minor injuries were given an intermediate importance score (6.5/10). Respondents advocated "rapid rule out" of acute medical problems by the emergency department (75%) and "any trained individual" carrying out ultrasound (72%) or stroke thrombolysis (59%) in the emergency department. Rapid sequence induction of anaesthesia exclusively by emergency physicians was unpopular (3%). Respondents were least satisfied with the study department’s documentation, availability of senior staff 24 h/day and the availability of equipment and drugs. Polyclinics and closure of smaller emergency department were unpopular future proposals, while 70% advocated a revival of traditional out-of-hours general practice services.

Conclusion: The perceived purpose, strengths and weaknesses of EM provide a focus for training and development, while opinion on new practices indicates areas where resistance to change may be met. The results can contribute to decision-making for emergency departments and for EM as it strives to adapt to its role in the modern NHS. Further similar studies are planned on a wider scale.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Primary survey
Kevin Mackway-Jones
Emerg. Med. J. 2009 26: 687. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article

Services
Google Scholar
PubMed
Topic Collections
Bookmark with

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

 

The journal is co-owned by and the official journal of College of Emergency Medicine

Official journal of British Association for Immediate Care: BASICS, Faculty of Pre-Hospital Care, Irish Society for Immediate Care and Swedish Society for Emergency Medicine: SweSEM

Emergency Medicine Jobs

Emergency Medicine Jobs