scholarly journals Modernising Medical Careers: a urological workforce perspective

2008 ◽  
Vol 90 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-26
Author(s):  
GO Hellawell ◽  
SS Kommu ◽  
F Mumtaz

The training of junior doctors in the UK is undergoing an evolution to ensure that those concerned are adequately trained and specialised for current and future consultant practice. The implementation of this training evolution is currently widespread at the foundation level (SHO-equivalent) and will expand to specialty training programmes as foundation programme trainees complete their training in 2007. Urology has led the change to the specialty training, with three-year trainees having entered the specialty in 2005. The emergence of urology as the lead specialty for change originated in part from a meeting in 1998 that addressed the future of urology and training, the summary of which was published later that year.

2013 ◽  
Vol 95 (2) ◽  
pp. 68-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
I Dash ◽  
JE Bickley ◽  
JD Morgan

Foundation trainees replaced the pre-registration house officers in August 2005 after Modernising Medical Careers was set up to 'drive up the quality of care for patients through reform and improvement in postgraduate medical education and training'. Doctors qualifying from UK medical schools entered into the foundation years, which consisted of two years of training designed to form a bridge between medical school and specialty training. All doctors wanting to apply for specialty training in the UK must complete their foundation programme or equivalent.


2013 ◽  
Vol 95 (6) ◽  
pp. 7-11
Author(s):  
AJ Batchelder ◽  
MJ McCarthy

Over the past decade training pathways in the UK have been subject to extensive changes. Concerns regarding the supervision and training of junior doctors led to a number of reforms that were implemented through the Modernising Medical Careers programme and these mandated formalisation of curricula for all specialties. Consequently, the surgical royal colleges of the UK and Ireland designed the Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme (ISCP), which delineates the framework for surgical training from core trainee level through to the award of a Certificate of Completion of training.


1978 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 705-710 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Pitcher ◽  
Howard Sergeant

SynopsisPatients admitted to Friern Hospital in 1972 stayed on average for about 5 weeks and spent a total of less than 2 hours individually with senior and junior doctors. Long-stay patients (1 year or more) saw their doctors for an average of less than 1 hour a year. These findings, which in the case of junior doctors were corroborated in 1974, refer only to the time doctors spent with patients alone. The admission, and long-stay discharge rates were greater in the Islington than in the Camden division, and probably reflect differences in clinical practice. It is argued that more psychiatrists are needed – precisely how many will depend on studies of the relative efficiency of different services and training programmes, and on agreement among psychiatrists about minimum professional standards.


2005 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Roseveare ◽  

The challenges and uncertainties of working in the developing field of Acute Medicine have been a regular theme for editorial comment in this journal since I took the helm in 2002. Almost four years on, with sub-specialty status confirmed, over 200 consultants and many SpRs enrolled in higher specialist training programmes throughout the UK, Acute Medicine finds itself in a much stronger position than any could have predicted at that time. Enthusiasm for the field is clear from the numbers of applicants for training programmes at SpR level, as well as the dramatic rise in attendances at acute medicine meetings across the country in the last year. However, on-going challenges remain. Eighteen months from now, Modernising Medical Careers will send shockwaves throughout hospital medicine. The exact nature of the change to our training programmes remains unclear, and will probably have changed again between my writing this and its publication. However it is essential that Acute Medicine is ready for whatever comes our way. We must work closely with our colleagues in Emergency Medicine and Critical Care to develop common stem training schemes which allow doctors to choose the area of ‘front door’ medicine which suits them best. Where possible we should seek to encourage dual accreditation in two or more of these areas. But most of all we need to maintain the momentum which has carried us so far in such a short space of time, and which has the potential to make Acute Medicine one of the largest hospital specialties. This edition’s review articles cover a varied mix of common and less common conditions on the acute medical ‘take’. Most medical admission units will be faced with at least one patient presenting with a seizure in each 24 hour period. Dr Kinton emphasises the importance of a good history in the management of this problem, but also provides some useful tips to help distinguish seizures from other causes of blackout. Distinction from syncope can be a particular challenge, not least because of the differing implications for driving, the loss of which can have devastating consequences. Acute ischaemic stroke is another common problem, the management of which is comprehensively reviewed by David Jarrett and Hemang Dave. As well as summarising some of the major trial data for thrombolytic and antiplatelet therapy, this review includes some advice on some of the common clinical challenges which don’t usually feature in text book descriptions of this condition. Less common, but no less important, Acute liver failure must be distinguished from decompensated chronic liver disease – the former often requiring discussion with a regional liver unit. Phil Berry has included a useful checklist to have to hand before making this phone call. Headache, palpitations and sweating is a common problem on the post-take ward round – particularly amongst the junior staff completing a night shift. Fortunately most junior doctors do not have a phaeochromocytoma – in common with every patient for whom I have ever requested 24 hour urinary catecholamine measurement. Having read Dr Solomon’s thorough review of the acute management of this condition I will now feel equipped to manage this condition when I finally get a positive result back from the laboratory! Apologies that this edition has been a little delayed – I hope you consider it to have been worth waiting for….


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e032021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Cleland ◽  
Gordon Prescott ◽  
Kim Walker ◽  
Peter Johnston ◽  
Ben Kumwenda

IntroductionKnowledge about the career decisions of doctors in relation to specialty (residency) training is essential in terms of UK workforce planning. However, little is known about which doctors elect to progress directly from Foundation Year 2 (F2) into core/specialty/general practice training and those who instead opt for an alternative next career step.ObjectiveTo identify if there were any individual differences between these two groups of doctors.DesignThis was a longitudinal, cohort study of ‘home’ students who graduated from UK medical schools between 2010 and 2015 and completed the Foundation Programme (FP) between 2012 and 2017.We used the UK Medical Education Database (UKMED) to access linked data from different sources, including medical school performance, specialty training applications and career preferences. Multivariable regression analyses were used to predict the odds of taking time out of training based on various sociodemographic factors.Results18 380/38 905 (47.2%) of F2 doctors applied for, and accepted, a training post offer immediately after completing F2. The most common pattern for doctors taking time out of the training pathway after FP was to have a 1-year (7155: 38.8%) or a 2-year break (2605: 14.0%) from training. The odds of not proceeding directly into core or specialty training were higher for those who were male, white, entered medical school as (high) school leavers and whose parents were educated to degree level. Doctors from areas of low participation in higher education were significantly (0.001) more likely to proceed directly into core or specialty training.ConclusionThe results show that UK doctors from higher socioeconomic groups are less likely to choose to progress directly from the FP into specialty training. The data suggest that widening access and encouraging more socioeconomic diversity in our medical students may be helpful in terms of attracting F2s into core/specialty training posts.


2007 ◽  
Vol 31 (8) ◽  
pp. 310-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kitty Seed ◽  
Lisa Davies ◽  
Ronan J. McIvor

Major changes are taking place in the way doctors are trained and assessed. A new curriculum, devised by the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges on behalf of Modernising Medical Careers, will be implemented for current junior doctors as part of the foundation and specialist training programmes. Every junior doctor will be expected to have a ‘personal learning plan’ to guide professional development and assist appraisal, and to build a portfolio to document their experiences. This marks a shift from traditional summative (i.e. examinations-based) evaluation to the use of more formative methods based on experience and workplace assessment. It reflects greater emphasis on continuing professional development and life-long learning (Wilkinson et al, 2002).


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. e023060 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul A Tiffin ◽  
James Orr ◽  
Lewis W Paton ◽  
Daniel T Smith ◽  
John J Norcini

ObjectivesTo compare the likelihood of success at selection into specialty training for doctors who were UK nationals but obtained their primary medical qualification (PMQ) from outside the UK (‘UK overseas graduates’) with other graduate groups based on their nationality and where they gained their PMQ. We also compared subsequent educational performance during postgraduate training between the graduate groups.DesignObservational study linking UK medical specialty recruitment data with postgraduate educational performance (Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) ratings).SettingDoctors recruited into national programmes of postgraduate specialist training in the UK from 2012 to 2016.Participants34 755 UK-based trainee doctors recruited into national specialty training programmes with at least one subsequent ARCP outcome reported during the study period, including 1108 UK overseas graduates.Main outcome measuresOdds of being deemed appointable at specialty selection and subsequent odds of obtaining a less versus more satisfactory category of ARCP outcome.ResultsUK overseas graduates were more likely to be deemed appointable compared with non-EU medical graduates who were not UK citizens (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.42), although less so than UK (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.27) or European graduates (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.75). However, UK overseas graduates were subsequently more likely to receive a less satisfactory outcome at ARCP than other graduate groups. Adjusting for age, sex, experience and the economic disparity between country of nationality and place of qualification reduced intergroup differences.ConclusionsThe failure of recruitment patterns to mirror the ARCP data raises issues regarding consistency in selection and the deaneries’ subsequent annual reviews. Excessive weight is possibly given to interview performance at specialty recruitment. Regulators and selectors should continue to develop robust processes for selection and assessment of doctors in training. Further support could be considered for UK overseas graduates returning to practice in the UK.


2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tina Ramkalawan ◽  
Paul Dieppe

The HSRC was awarded a large core grant specifically for research capacity development and training, with the aim of facilitating future high quality HSR in the UK. This was used to pursue three main areas of activity. First, the provision of small grants to facilitate the development of new work, help create new, multidisciplinary groupings and support junior researchers. Of the various schemes discussed, the research initiation grants (max £6000) and workshop awards (max £3000) appear to have been particularly valuable. Second, appoint cohorts of PhD students to pursue four-year training programmes (rather than the traditional three years), during which they received individualized research training and development opportunities with an emphasis on both multidisciplinary HSR training and generic skills training, as well as pursuing their own research projects. Third, improving research training opportunities by developing networks for research staff at various stages in their careers and organizing workshops and courses in specialist HSR subjects, and for generic skills training. The premature closure of the HSRC prevented us from fully evaluating these initiatives and, arguably, their real value will not be apparent for some years. However, we believe that the programme was successful and that it went some way to helping us break out from the traditional, entrenched approaches to research training, and to helping us think of research capacity development as being as important as doing the research itself. But much more remains to be done.


Dental Update ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (6) ◽  
pp. 527-528 ◽  
Author(s):  
Faye Doughty ◽  
Catherine Moshkun

COVID-19 has had a huge impact on dentistry. Dental care professionals work in close proximity with patients, they are therefore at high risk of contracting coronavirus. As of 25th March, all routine dentistry was postponed. The pandemic has led to clinic closures, university closures and postponement of exams and interviews. This has resulted in a deficit in clinical exposure for undergraduates and trainees. Changes in examination format have been implemented to prevent delays in course completions. The GDC have reassured that measures are being put in place to reduce the effect of COVID-19 on training. CPD/Clinical Relevance: This article aims to explore the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on dental education and dental training programmes in the UK.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document