Foundations of Emergency Medicine: Impact of a Standardized, Open-access, Core Content Curriculum on In-Training Exam Scores.

Introduction: Learners frequently benefit from modalities such as small-group, case-based teaching and interactive didactic experiences rather than passive learning methods. These contemporary techniques are features of Foundations of Emergency Medicine (FoEM) curricula, and particularly the Foundations I (F1) course, which targets first-year resident (PGY-1) learners. The American Board of Emergency Medicine administers the in-training exam (ITE) that provides an annual assessment of EM-specific medical knowledge. We sought to assess the effect of F1 implementation on ITE scores.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from interns at four EM residency programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. We collected data in 2021. Participating sites were geographically diverse and included three- and four-year training formats. We collected data from interns two years before (control group) and two years after (intervention group) implementation of F1 at each site. Year of F1 implementation ranged from 2015-2018 at participating sites. We abstracted data using a standard form including program, ITE raw score, year of ITE administration, US Medical Licensing Exam Step 1 score, Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) score, and gender. We performed univariable and multivariable linear regression to explore differences between intervention and control groups.

Results: We collected data for 180 PGY-1s. Step 1 and Step 2 CK scores were significant predictors of ITE in univariable analyses (both with  < 0.001). After accounting for Step 1 and Step 2 CK scores, we did not find F1 implementation to be a significant predictor of ITE score,  = 0.83.

Conclusion: Implementation of F1 curricula did not show significant changes in performance on the ITE after controlling for important variables.