Welcome to the Department of Emergency Medicine at the University of Maryland School of Medicine.
We aim to be the preeminent academic department of emergency medicine, renowned globally for unparalleled education, unrivaled patient-centered care, pioneering research, and for training the next generation of innovative leaders in medicine.
We are a multifaceted team of more than 80 faculty physicians shaping the future of emergency medicine. We teach at the bedside, in the classroom, and alongside colleagues at the local, national, and international levels. Over four decades, we have developed a well-earned reputation as top emergency medicine educators. Our faculty are thought leaders who publish textbooks and articles in leading emergency medicine journals, lecture nationally and internationally, and produce web-based materials that are trusted by countless physicians around the world.
Every year, we treat more than 175,000 patients across the city of Baltimore—including at the University of Maryland Medical Center’s downtown and midtown campuses, Mercy Medical Center, and the Baltimore VA Medical Center. These facilities are enriched with state-of-the-art technology—from point-of-care ultrasound to hyperbaric chambers, advanced radiological and airway equipment, comprehensive stroke centers, and much more.
In addition to our highly regarded emergency medicine residency program, we host unique, combined multi-specialty training programs with internal medicine, internal medicine/critical care, and pediatrics. Our department also offers postgraduate fellowship training in Faculty Development, Simulation, Risk Management, Emergency Cardiology, Ultrasound, Administration, and Health Policy.
At the University of Maryland School of Medicine, our emergency medicine faculty are physicians—and so much more. We are educators, researchers, and healthcare administrators. We are entrepreneurs, policy experts, and medical informaticists. We are mentors, colleagues, leaders, and friends.
We are honored to serve our neighbors in Baltimore and the patients who trust us in their greatest times of need. Thank you for taking part in our dynamic mission to stabilize the injured, heal the sick, and save lives.
Mike Winters, MD, MBA
Interim Chair, Department of Emergency Medicine
|
On December 30, Assistant Professor Megan Cobb, MD, DPT, was interviewed by Baltimore’s ABC affiliate, WMAR 2, on the rapidly spreading flu strain. (continued)
Associate Professor Gentry Wilkerson, MD, was quoted in a January 6 Baltimore Sun article on medotomindine, a new additive to fentanyl. (continued)
On December 19, Assistant Professor Anthony Roggio, MD, participated in a webinar hosted by HealthLeaders. (continued)
Study Overview Title: Identification of Knee Effusions With Ultrasound: A Comparison of Three Methods Design: Prospective cohort study Setting: Outpatient orthopaedic clinic Participants: 52 adults (104 knees), including 57 painful knees Objective Determine whether two simple dynamic techniques improve ultrasound detection of suprapatellar knee effusions compared with static scanning. Ultrasound Methods Compared Static scanning: Patient relaxed; standard long- and short-axis views. Parapatellar pressure (Method 1): Examiner compresses medial and lateral parapatellar recesses during scanning. Quadriceps contraction (Method 2): Patient actively contracts quadriceps during scanning. Outcome Measure Presence of fluid in the suprapatellar recess (graded using a standardized ultrasound effusion scale). Key Results Effusions detected: Static scanning: 45 Parapatellar pressure: 58 Quadriceps contraction: 77 Comparative performance: Quadriceps contraction was superior to parapatellar pressure for detecting: All effusions (PR 1.33; P < 0.001) Painful knees (PR 1.24; P = 0.036) Painless knees (PR 1.50; P = 0.006) Both dynamic methods outperformed static scanning. Additional detection beyond static scanning: Parapatellar pressure: +16.9% of knees Quadriceps contraction: +54.2% of knees Reliability (Inter-rater Agreement) Static scanning: ? = 0.771 Parapatellar pressure: ? = 0.686 Quadriceps contraction: ? = 0.846 All methods showed high reliability, with quadriceps contraction highest. Conclusions Both parapatellar pressure and patient-initiated quadriceps contraction significantly improve ultrasound detection of suprapatellar knee effusions. Quadriceps contraction is the most effective method, especially for small or occult (grade 1) effusions.... (continued)
The European resuscitation council recommends AL (anterior-lateral) pad positioning while the American Heart Association recommends AL or AP (anterior-posterior)... (continued)
Low functional status: Poor functional status. Older patients with high prevalence of frailty at discharge and high functional needs who are often discharged... (continued)
Begin by asking the patient to localize the point of maximal tenderness, then place a linear or curvilinear transducer over the area of concern. If there... (continued)
In 261 ED patients over age 65 receiving first generation antihistamines, 15% had an adverse reaction. Most common was delirium and urinary retention. Age... (continued)
