Exposure or expert? Setting standards for postgraduate education through a Delphi technique

Area of Science:

• Medical Education
• Anatomy
• Emergency Medicine

Background:

• Developing effective anatomy curricula for emergency clinicians is crucial.
• Expert panels often create syllabi based on perceived importance.
• Understanding trainee exposure to anatomical concepts in practice is vital.

Purpose of the Study:

• To assess if an expert-panel-generated upper limb anatomy syllabus for emergency clinicians aligns with trainee clinical practice.
• To identify discrepancies between expert-defined curriculum content and real-world clinical exposure.

Main Methods:

• A three-round Delphi study involving an expert group.
• Comparison of the expert syllabus with a measure of anatomical concept exposure in emergency medicine trainees' daily practice.

Main Results:

• 404 upper limb anatomical facts were reviewed by both experts and trainees.
• A low agreement (kappa = 0.348) was found between the expert group and trainees.
• Significant disparity exists between expert-recommended and trainee-experienced anatomical knowledge.

Conclusions:

• Expert-defined curricula may not reflect the practical anatomical knowledge required by emergency medicine trainees.
• Curriculum development should balance expert-identified importance with common clinical exposure.
• An expert:exposure matrix can guide the development of more relevant medical education curricula.