Two Years or Three? Rethinking the Ideal PEM Training Timeline.

Area of Science:

• Medical Education
• Pediatric Subspecialties
• Emergency Medicine

Background:

• National discussions address pediatric subspecialty training duration due to workforce and financial concerns.
• Accrediting bodies' decisions on training length lack clear data or defined drivers.
• Pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) training duration is a key area of focus.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the existing 3-year PEM fellowship training model with a potential 2-year model.
• To analyze the rationale and potential impacts of each training duration.
• To inform national conversations on optimal PEM fellowship length.

Main Methods:

• Comparative analysis of 3-year vs. 2-year PEM fellowship training models.
• Discussion of impacts on recruitment, clinical competency, scholarly activity, and career preparation.
• Consideration of stakeholder perspectives (trainees, program leadership).

Main Results:

• The 3-year model provides comprehensive training but may affect recruitment and finances.
• A 2-year model could improve recruitment and financial efficiency but may impact depth of training.
• Key differences lie in the balance between training breadth, depth, and career readiness.

Conclusions:

• Both 2-year and 3-year PEM fellowship models have distinct advantages and disadvantages.
• Informing future decisions requires a balanced consideration of all impacts.
• Further exploration of stakeholder experiences is crucial for optimal training structure.