Fellowship Director's Meeting - San Francisco, CA

Meeting date - Jan 24, 1999, 4-5:30 pm

29 different US programs were represented and I believe 2 Canadian programs were represented at the meeting.

1. Ken Tegtmeyer presented an update on the CCM Website and the need for continued participation in the on-line journal club

2. Dan Notterman from the ABP presented a discussion regarding the research requirements for fellows, in order to be eligible for the certification exam. He presented no new requirements, just emphasized that most fellows do not have published manuscripts at the time of their application to sit for the boards. Many only present a work in progress. This requires that the board examine the quality of this work in progress. It is unclear how many fellows ultimately complete the aforementioned works in progress.

   We also discussed the broad outline of elements in a research curriculum that the ABP provided to the fellowship directors.

3. Research Curriculum - Randall Wetzel continues to work on this

4. ACGME accreditation of programs revision. Lengthy discussion about the proposed changes to the accreditation requirements took place. Please see my previous mailing on this topic (mailed yesterday). The proposed changes are on the web under the ACGME and individuals are encouraged to send comment to the ACGME by March 1, if they choose. If your program is unable to meet some specific aspect of the requirements, then forward that information to Rich Brilli. He will serve as a tally house for the numbers of programs no meeting specific requirements.

5. NRMP Match Program for Peds CCM Fellowships: The results of the survey that was sent to everyone is attached as a Word 97 document. This was a handout at the meeting. The survey revealed that 44 of 48 programs would be in favor of a match if all programs participated.

   Lengthy discussion took place about the pro and con of a match for fellows. In the end, it was believed that a match provided an opportunity for programs to see more applicants without the pressure to accept good applicants too early and applicants could see more programs without the need to accept into programs at such an early stage of training.

   The majority vote was to begin a match program. 16 in favor, 7 against, 5 abstentions. Harris Baden and Rich Brilli will examine the details of such endeavor with the NRMP. This could not begin before the 2001 year of acceptance.

Respectfully submitted,

Rich Brilli
Chair, Peds Critical Care Medicine Fellowship Directors Section
brilli@chmcc.org