Challenges Facing Emergency Medicine Residents in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Authors

  • Aisha Alqahtani Emergency Department, King Fahed Medical City, Saudi Arabia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.52609/jmlph.v1i3.31

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Background: Challenges related to the residency programme differ according to residents’ roles, interactions, culture, responsibilities and expectations.

Aim: This study aims to explore the challenges faced by emergency medicine physicians during their residency programme. We also aim to investigate the influence of several demographic variables on their training experience.

Method: This is a cross-sectional study, conducted in Saudi Arabia from June, 2021 to July 2021, using a survey designed by the author. 

Results: The total number of participants was 37. Of these, 24.3% (n=9) were R1 residents, 10.8% (n=4) were R2, 35.1% (n=13) were R3, and 29.7% (n=11) were R4. While most of the participants (89%) clearly understood which reference to use for studying, only 56.7% had a clear understanding of how to study for the exams. Reading club was advocated by 72% of participants, and only half the participants had a positive perception of leading, preparing, and discussing topics during academic activity. Of all the residency levels, R3 residents were the most supportive of having expert physician guidance during ED procedures, p=0.04. Other factors given more importance by R3 residents than by other levels were mentorship, p=0.051, and having a course review for the exam, p=0.001.

Conclusion: This study uncovers several challenges reported by participants from different residency levels. We noted that the R3 training level, being a period of transition from junior to senior level, is a significant period requiring more attention; more emphasis on mentorship and reading club is advocated.

Downloads

Published

2021-08-14

How to Cite

Alqahtani, A. (2021). Challenges Facing Emergency Medicine Residents in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study. The Journal of Medicine, Law & Public Health, 1(3), 62–66. https://doi.org/10.52609/jmlph.v1i3.31

Issue

Section

Original Articles