The National Association of Medical Emergency Technicians (ANTEM) has expressed concern over the absence of a comprehensive regulation for the Pre-Hospital Emergency Technician (TEPH) course, stating that such a framework is essential for trainees. The association highlighted that the descriptive guide for the course, reportedly in existence according to the National Institute of Medical Emergency (INEM), has not been distributed to the trainees.
The TEPH course, which commenced earlier this year, has been met with criticism from several trainees who have pointed out irregularities in the training, including inconsistencies in evaluation methods, and have even considered contesting the course.
In a statement following the reported grievances, INEM acknowledged receiving five complaints about the TEPH course, emphasizing that training is proceeding “based on the descriptive memory of the respective pedagogical product, establishing uniform evaluation criteria,” though no formal regulation currently exists.
ANTEM maintains that the descriptive guide does not hold the same weight as a regulation and pointed out that access to the manuals, regardless of format, “should be provided 10 working days before the start of the modules, which we know did not occur.”
The association indicated there are “too many discrepancies” that are “common to other pedagogical products of INEM.”
Furthermore, ANTEM plans to request an audience with the independent technical committee tasked with overhauling INEM to address “these and other discrepancies,” which they deem “detrimental to the system, especially in emergency medical care delivery to citizens.”
In response to inquiries on this issue, the Union of Pre-Hospital Emergency Technicians (STEPH) stated that, according to an initial legal assessment, a regulation is mandatory for this type of course “so that professionals formally understand under which conditions they might be expelled or not.”
STEPH described the entire course process as “confusing” and sought clarifications from the president of INEM.
Following the disclosures from ANTEM and STEPH, it was revealed that training test answers for TEPH are being shared in a WhatsApp group with dozens of trainees, prompting the association to call for urgent intervention from the appropriate authorities.
Lusa accessed documents containing questions/statements and their respective answers shared in this group, along with conversations among trainees divided into classes for various training modules conducted at different times.
A trainee, who wished to remain anonymous, revealed that at least one group comprising over 80 trainees has been operational since the start of the training, sharing evaluation results from the various modules.
“We are divided into classes taking different modules, and results are shared. Answers are passed between each other,” the source explained.
Another trainee mentioned that in online training, tests conducted at the end of each module are “almost identical” to those that need to be done in person. Since classes simultaneously undergo different modules, “answers are shared.”
