An international survey of training in adult intensive care medicine

• Published in: Intensive care medicine Vol. 31; no. 4; pp. 553 - 561
• Main Authors: Barrett, H, Bion, J F
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Springer 01.04.2005; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Adult; Critical Care; Data Collection; Developed Countries; Education, Medical - organization & administration; Emergency medical personnel; Emergency medicine; Humans; Internationality; Models, Educational; Problem-Based Learning - organization & administration; Professional Competence; Specialization; Training
• ISSN: 0342-4642; 1432-1238
• DOI: 10.1007/s00134-005-2583-7

The aim of this international survey of training in adult intensive care medicine (ICM) was to characterise current structures, processes, and outcomes to determine the potential for convergence to a common competency-based training programme across national borders. This survey is the first phase of a 3 year project which will use consensus methods to build an international competency-based training programme in ICM in Europe (CoBaTrICE). A survey by questionnaire, e-mail, and direct discussion was undertaken with national ICM representatives from seven geographical regions. Responses were obtained from 41 countries (countries which share common training programmes were grouped together; n=38). Fifty-four different training programmes were identified, 37 within the European region; three (6%) were competency-based. Twenty (53%) permitted multidisciplinary access to a common training programme; in nine (24%) training was only available within anaesthesia. The minimum duration of ICM training required for recognition as a specialist varied from 3 months to 72 months (mode 24 months). The content of most (75%) ICM programmes was standardised nationally. Work-based assessment of competence was formally documented in nineteen (50%) countries. An exam was mandatory in twenty-nine (76%). There are considerable variations in the structures and processes of ICM training worldwide. However, as competency-based training is an outcome strategy rather than a didactic process, these differences should not impede the development of a common international competency-based training programme in ICM.