The present state of neurointensivist training in the United States: A comparison to other critical care training programs

Evie G. Marcolini, David B. Seder, Jordan B. Bonomo, Thomas P. Bleck, J. Claude Hemphill, Lori Shutter, Fred Rincon, Shelly Timmons, Paulmdmph Nyquist

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: This manuscript describes the state of neurocritical care fellowship training, compares its written standards to those of other critical care fellowship programs, and discusses how programmatic oversight by the United Council for Neurological Subspecialties should evolve to meet American College of Graduate Medical Education standards. This review is a work product of the Society of Critical Care Medicine Neuroscience section and was reviewed and approved by the Council of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. Data Sources: We evaluated the published training criteria and requirements of American College of Graduate Medical Education Critical Care subspecialty fellowships programs of Internal Medicine, Surgery, and Anesthesia and compared them with the training criteria and required competencies for neurocritical care. Study Selection: We have reviewed the published training standards from American College of Graduate Medical Education as well as the United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties subspecialty training documents and clarified the definition and responsibilities of an intensivist with reference to the Leapfrog Group, the National Quality Forum, and the Joint Commission. Data Extraction: No data at present exist to test the concept of similarity across specialty fellowship critical care training programs. Data Synthesis: Neurocritical care training differs in its exposure to clinical entities that are directly associated to other critical care subspecialties. However, the core critical care knowledge, procedural skills, and competencies standards for neurocritical care appears to be similar with some important differences compared with American College of Graduate Medical Education critical care training programs. Conclusions: The United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties has developed a directed program development strategy to emulate American College of Graduate Medical Education standards with the goal to have standards that are similar or identical to American College of Graduate Medical Education standards. (Crit Care Med 2018; 46:307-315)

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)307-315
Number of pages9
JournalCritical care medicine
Volume46
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2018

Fingerprint

Graduate Medical Education
Critical Care
Education
Nervous System
Program Development
Information Storage and Retrieval
Internal Medicine
Neurosciences
Anesthesia
Joints

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Marcolini, E. G., Seder, D. B., Bonomo, J. B., Bleck, T. P., Claude Hemphill, J., Shutter, L., ... Nyquist, P. (2018). The present state of neurointensivist training in the United States: A comparison to other critical care training programs. Critical care medicine, 46(2), 307-315. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000002876
Marcolini, Evie G. ; Seder, David B. ; Bonomo, Jordan B. ; Bleck, Thomas P. ; Claude Hemphill, J. ; Shutter, Lori ; Rincon, Fred ; Timmons, Shelly ; Nyquist, Paulmdmph. / The present state of neurointensivist training in the United States : A comparison to other critical care training programs. In: Critical care medicine. 2018 ; Vol. 46, No. 2. pp. 307-315.
@article{b9baa21fddf04f169ea396632acf20c3,
title = "The present state of neurointensivist training in the United States: A comparison to other critical care training programs",
abstract = "Objective: This manuscript describes the state of neurocritical care fellowship training, compares its written standards to those of other critical care fellowship programs, and discusses how programmatic oversight by the United Council for Neurological Subspecialties should evolve to meet American College of Graduate Medical Education standards. This review is a work product of the Society of Critical Care Medicine Neuroscience section and was reviewed and approved by the Council of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. Data Sources: We evaluated the published training criteria and requirements of American College of Graduate Medical Education Critical Care subspecialty fellowships programs of Internal Medicine, Surgery, and Anesthesia and compared them with the training criteria and required competencies for neurocritical care. Study Selection: We have reviewed the published training standards from American College of Graduate Medical Education as well as the United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties subspecialty training documents and clarified the definition and responsibilities of an intensivist with reference to the Leapfrog Group, the National Quality Forum, and the Joint Commission. Data Extraction: No data at present exist to test the concept of similarity across specialty fellowship critical care training programs. Data Synthesis: Neurocritical care training differs in its exposure to clinical entities that are directly associated to other critical care subspecialties. However, the core critical care knowledge, procedural skills, and competencies standards for neurocritical care appears to be similar with some important differences compared with American College of Graduate Medical Education critical care training programs. Conclusions: The United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties has developed a directed program development strategy to emulate American College of Graduate Medical Education standards with the goal to have standards that are similar or identical to American College of Graduate Medical Education standards. (Crit Care Med 2018; 46:307-315)",
author = "Marcolini, {Evie G.} and Seder, {David B.} and Bonomo, {Jordan B.} and Bleck, {Thomas P.} and {Claude Hemphill}, J. and Lori Shutter and Fred Rincon and Shelly Timmons and Paulmdmph Nyquist",
year = "2018",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/CCM.0000000000002876",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "46",
pages = "307--315",
journal = "Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "0090-3493",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

Marcolini, EG, Seder, DB, Bonomo, JB, Bleck, TP, Claude Hemphill, J, Shutter, L, Rincon, F, Timmons, S & Nyquist, P 2018, 'The present state of neurointensivist training in the United States: A comparison to other critical care training programs', Critical care medicine, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 307-315. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000002876

The present state of neurointensivist training in the United States : A comparison to other critical care training programs. / Marcolini, Evie G.; Seder, David B.; Bonomo, Jordan B.; Bleck, Thomas P.; Claude Hemphill, J.; Shutter, Lori; Rincon, Fred; Timmons, Shelly; Nyquist, Paulmdmph.

In: Critical care medicine, Vol. 46, No. 2, 01.02.2018, p. 307-315.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The present state of neurointensivist training in the United States

T2 - A comparison to other critical care training programs

AU - Marcolini, Evie G.

AU - Seder, David B.

AU - Bonomo, Jordan B.

AU - Bleck, Thomas P.

AU - Claude Hemphill, J.

AU - Shutter, Lori

AU - Rincon, Fred

AU - Timmons, Shelly

AU - Nyquist, Paulmdmph

PY - 2018/2/1

Y1 - 2018/2/1

N2 - Objective: This manuscript describes the state of neurocritical care fellowship training, compares its written standards to those of other critical care fellowship programs, and discusses how programmatic oversight by the United Council for Neurological Subspecialties should evolve to meet American College of Graduate Medical Education standards. This review is a work product of the Society of Critical Care Medicine Neuroscience section and was reviewed and approved by the Council of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. Data Sources: We evaluated the published training criteria and requirements of American College of Graduate Medical Education Critical Care subspecialty fellowships programs of Internal Medicine, Surgery, and Anesthesia and compared them with the training criteria and required competencies for neurocritical care. Study Selection: We have reviewed the published training standards from American College of Graduate Medical Education as well as the United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties subspecialty training documents and clarified the definition and responsibilities of an intensivist with reference to the Leapfrog Group, the National Quality Forum, and the Joint Commission. Data Extraction: No data at present exist to test the concept of similarity across specialty fellowship critical care training programs. Data Synthesis: Neurocritical care training differs in its exposure to clinical entities that are directly associated to other critical care subspecialties. However, the core critical care knowledge, procedural skills, and competencies standards for neurocritical care appears to be similar with some important differences compared with American College of Graduate Medical Education critical care training programs. Conclusions: The United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties has developed a directed program development strategy to emulate American College of Graduate Medical Education standards with the goal to have standards that are similar or identical to American College of Graduate Medical Education standards. (Crit Care Med 2018; 46:307-315)

AB - Objective: This manuscript describes the state of neurocritical care fellowship training, compares its written standards to those of other critical care fellowship programs, and discusses how programmatic oversight by the United Council for Neurological Subspecialties should evolve to meet American College of Graduate Medical Education standards. This review is a work product of the Society of Critical Care Medicine Neuroscience section and was reviewed and approved by the Council of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. Data Sources: We evaluated the published training criteria and requirements of American College of Graduate Medical Education Critical Care subspecialty fellowships programs of Internal Medicine, Surgery, and Anesthesia and compared them with the training criteria and required competencies for neurocritical care. Study Selection: We have reviewed the published training standards from American College of Graduate Medical Education as well as the United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties subspecialty training documents and clarified the definition and responsibilities of an intensivist with reference to the Leapfrog Group, the National Quality Forum, and the Joint Commission. Data Extraction: No data at present exist to test the concept of similarity across specialty fellowship critical care training programs. Data Synthesis: Neurocritical care training differs in its exposure to clinical entities that are directly associated to other critical care subspecialties. However, the core critical care knowledge, procedural skills, and competencies standards for neurocritical care appears to be similar with some important differences compared with American College of Graduate Medical Education critical care training programs. Conclusions: The United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties has developed a directed program development strategy to emulate American College of Graduate Medical Education standards with the goal to have standards that are similar or identical to American College of Graduate Medical Education standards. (Crit Care Med 2018; 46:307-315)

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85051742227&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85051742227&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002876

DO - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002876

M3 - Article

C2 - 29239885

AN - SCOPUS:85051742227

VL - 46

SP - 307

EP - 315

JO - Critical Care Medicine

JF - Critical Care Medicine

SN - 0090-3493

IS - 2

ER -