Multispecialty Structured Case Review to Enhance Emergency Medicine Resuscitation Learning

Introduction: Emergency medicine (EM) residents must master resuscitation across multiple disciplines, including medical, trauma, and pediatric emergencies. However, the dynamic clinical environment, time constraints of on-shift teaching, and variable patient exposure limit learning opportunities. With increased emphasis on core competencies and national standardization by the ACGME, there is a clear need for structured, high-yield resuscitation education in EM training.


Methods: Resuscitation Review was a quarterly, case-based series incorporated into the EM residency conference schedule at a large academic community medical center from Fall 2022 to Spring 2024. Residents presented real resuscitation cases, followed by structured, multidisciplinary discussions with EM and critical care faculty. Sessions focused on pathophysiology, decision-making, alternative management, and patient outcomes. The format encouraged interdisciplinary learning, reflection, and open dialogue. Post-session surveys assessed educational value, relevance, and impact on resident confidence in managing critical patients. AI-assistance with ChatGPT was used to condense paragraph structure for brevity. Final content was reviewed and edited by the authors.


Results: Of the 56 residents in training during the series, 25 (44.6%) completed the survey. Nearly all (92%) reported applying knowledge gained from sessions in clinical practice, and 96% felt increased comfort managing critical patients and communicating with consultants. All respondents found the series valuable to their EM education. The average recommendation rating was 9.48/10 (SD = 0.93). Residents preferred a pace of three cases per hour, with a mean session length of 1.5 hours. Qualitative feedback highlighted the value of open discussion, real-case learning, and multidisciplinary perspectives. Suggestions included allowing more time for dialogue, improving imaging, and clearer take home points.


Conclusions: This longitudinal series provided residents a collaborative forum to review high-acuity cases, reflect on clinical reasoning, and reframe challenges into learning opportunities. Survey responses reflected strong educational value, clinical relevance, and improved preparedness. Positive feedback supports the series' role in building evidence-based resuscitation expertise.