V.J. Gokani

Integrated surgical academic training in the UK: a cross-sectional survey

Objectives This study aimed to explore variations in the provision of integrated academic surgical training across the UK. Design This is an online cross-sectional survey (consisting of 44 items with a range of free-text, binomial and 5-point Likert scale responses) developed by the Association of Surgeons in Training. Setting A self-reported survey instrument was distributed to academic surgical trainees across the UK (n=276). Participants 143 (51.9%) responses were received (81% male, median age: 34 years), spanning all UK regions and surgical specialties. Of the 143 trainees, 29 were core trainees (20.3%), 99 were specialty trainees (69.2%) and 15 (10.5%) described themselves as research fellows. Results The structure of academic training varied considerably, with under a third of trainees receiving guaranteed protected time for research. Despite this, however, 53.1% of the respondents reported to be satisfied with how their academic training was organised. Covering clinical duties during academic time occurred commonly (72.7%). Although most trainees (n=88, 61.5%) met with their academic supervisor at least once a month, six (4.2%) never had an academic supervisory meeting. Most trainees (n=90, 62.9%) occupied a full-time rota slot and only 9.1% (n=13) described their role as ‘supernumerary’. Although 58.7% (n=84) of the trainees were satisfied with their clinical competence, 37.8% (n=54) felt that clinical time focused more on service provision than the acquisition of technical skills. 58 (40.6%) had experienced some form of negative sentiment relating to their status as an academic trainee. Conclusions Integrated academic training presents unique challenges and opportunities within surgery. This survey has identified variation in the quality of current programmes, meaning that the future provision of integrated surgical academic training should be carefully considered.

Less than full-time training in surgery: a cross-sectional study evaluating the accessibility and experiences of flexible training in the surgical trainee workforce

Objectives Generational changes in lifestyle expectations, working environments and the feminisation of the medical workforce have seen an increased demand in postgraduate less than full-time training (LTFT). Despite this, concerns remain regarding access to, and information about, flexible training for surgeons. This study aimed to assess the opinions and experiences of LTFT for surgical trainees. Design Prospective, questionnaire-based cross-sectional study. Setting/participants An electronic, self-administered questionnaire was distributed in the UK and Republic of Ireland through mailing lists via the Association of Surgeons in Training and British Orthopedic Trainee Association. Results Overall, 876 completed responses were received, representing all grades of trainee across all 10 surgical specialties. Median age was 33 years and 63.4% were female. Of those who had undertaken LTFT, 92.5% (148/160) were female. Most worked 60% of a full-time post (86/160, 53.8%). The reasons for either choosing or considering LTFT were childrearing (82.7%), caring for a dependent (12.6%) and sporting commitments (6.8%). Males were less likely to list childrearing than females (64.9% vs 87.6%; p<0.0001). Only 38% (60/160) found the application process easy and 53.8% (86/160) experienced undermining behaviour from workplace staff as a result of undertaking LTFT. Of all respondents, an additional 53.7% (385/716) would consider LTFT in future; 27.5% of which were male (106/385). Overall, only 9.9% of all respondents rated current LTFT information as adequate. Common sources of information were other trainees (47.3%), educational supervisors (20.6%) and local postgraduate school website (19.5%). Conclusions Over half of surgical trainees working LTFT have experienced undermining behaviour as a result of their LTFT. Despite a reported need for LTFT in both genders, this remains difficult to organise, access to useful information is poor and negative attitudes among staff remain. Recommendations are made to provide improved support and information for those wishing to pursue LTFT.

Less Than Full-time Training in surgical specialities: Consensus recommendations for flexible training by the Association of Surgeons in Training.

Changes in lifestyle, career expectations, and working environments, alongside the feminisation of the workforce have resulted in an increased demand for Less Than Full-time Training (LTFT) within surgery. However, provision of and adequacy of flexible training remain variable. It is important that LTFT options are provided to ensure surgery is an attractive and viable career option, and can compete with other specialties to attract and retain the best candidates to maintain high standards of patient care. LTFT options should be readily available to both genders within surgical specialities. Furthermore, improved information for those considering LTFT should be available, locally, regionally and nationally. Training within LTFT posts should be tailored to the training requirements of the individual, in order to achieve the competencies necessary for completion of training. The recommendations set out in this consensus statement should inform the trainees position and help guide discussions with respect to the provision of LTFT within surgery.

Further concerns about the Shape of Training proposals

We would like to add our concerns to those of Dean regarding the recommendations made by Greenaway.1 Of primary concern is that the review risks introducing a subconsultant grade, which would be detrimental to patient care and the NHS. We would also urge caution that levels of competence should not be reduced nor …

Cross-sectional study of the financial cost of training to the surgical trainee in the UK and Ireland

Objectives Applications for surgical training have declined over the last decade, and anecdotally the costs of training at the expense of the surgical trainee are rising. We aimed to quantify the costs surgical trainees are expected to cover for postgraduate training. Design Prospective, cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study. Setting/Participants A non-mandatory online questionnaire for UK-based trainees was distributed nationally. A similar national questionnaire was distributed for Ireland, taking into account differences between the healthcare systems. Only fully completed responses were included. Results There were 848 and 58 fully completed responses from doctors based in the UK and Ireland, respectively. Medical students in the UK reported a significant increase in debt on graduation by 55% from £17 892 (2000–2004) to £27 655 (2010–2014) (p<0.01). 41% of specialty trainees in the UK indicated that some or all of their study budget was used to fund mandatory regional teaching. By the end of training, a surgical trainee in the UK spends on average £9105 on courses, £5411 on conferences and £4185 on exams, not covered by training budget. Irish trainees report similarly high costs. Most trainees undertake a higher degree during their postgraduate training. The cost of achieving the mandatory requirements for completion of training ranges between £20 000 and £26 000 (dependent on specialty), except oral and maxillofacial surgery, which is considerably higher (£71 431). Conclusions Medical students are graduating with significantly larger debt than before. Surgical trainees achieve their educational requirements at substantial personal expenditure. To encourage graduates to pursue and remain in surgical training, urgent action is required to fund the mandatory requirements and annual training costs for completion of training and provide greater transparency to inform doctors of what their postgraduate training costs will be. This is necessary to increase diversity in surgery, reduce debt load and ensure surgery remains a popular career choice.

Consultant outcomes publication and surgical training: Consensus recommendations by the association of surgeons in training.

Consultant Outcomes Publication (COP) has the longest history in cardiothoracic surgery, where it was introduced in 2005. Subsequently COP has been broadened to include all surgical specialties in NHS England in 2013-14. The Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) fully supports efforts to improve patient care and trust in the profession and is keen to overcome potential unintended adverse effects of COP. Identification of these adverse effects is the first step in this process: Firstly, there is a risk that COP may lead to reluctance by consultants to provide trainees with the necessary appropriate primary operator experience to become skilled consultant surgeons for the future. Secondly, COP may lead to inappropriately cautious case selection. This adjusted case mix affects both patients who are denied operations, and also limits the complexity of the case mix to which surgical trainees are exposed. Thirdly, COP undermines efforts to train surgical trainees in non-technical skills and human factors, simply obliterating the critical role of the multidisciplinary team and organisational processes in determining outcomes. This tunnel vision masks opportunities to improve patient care and outcomes at a unit level. It also misinforms the public as to the root causes of adverse events by failing to identify care process deficiencies. Finally, for safe surgical care, graduate retention and morale is important - COP may lead to high calibre trainees opting out of surgical careers, or opting to work abroad. The negative effects of COP on surgical training and trainees must be addressed as high quality surgical training and retention of high calibre graduates is essential for excellent patient care.

The non-medical workforce and its role in surgical training: Consensus recommendations by the Association of Surgeons in Training

Changes in the delivery of the healthcare structure have led to the expansion of the non-medical workforce (NMW). The non-medical practitioner in surgery (a healthcare professional without a medical degree who undertakes specialist training) is a valuable addition to a surgical firm. However, there are a number of challenges regarding the successful widespread implementation of this role. This paper outlines a number of these concerns, and makes recommendations to aid the realisation of the non-medical practitioner as a normal part of the surgical team. In summary, the Association of Surgeons in Training welcomes the development of the non-medical workforce as part of the surgical team in order to promote enhanced patient care and improved surgical training opportunities. However, establishing a workforce of independent/semi-independent practitioners who compete for the same training opportunities as surgeons in training may threaten the UK surgical training system, and therefore the care of our future patients.

The future of surgical training in the context of the ‘Shape of Training’ Review: Consensus recommendations by the Association of Surgeons in Training

ASiT has long maintained that in order to provide the best quality care to patients in the UK and Republic of Ireland, it is critical that surgeons are trained to the highest standards. In addition, it is imperative that surgery remains an attractive career choice, with opportunities for career progression and job satisfaction to attract and retain the best candidates. In 2013, the Shape of Training review report set out recommendations for the structure and delivery of postgraduate training in light of an ever increasingly poly-morbid and ageing population. This consensus statement outlines ASITs position regarding recommendations for improving surgical training and aims to help guide discussions with regard to future proposed changes to surgical training.

What shape do UK trainees want their training to be? Results of a cross-sectional study

Objectives The British Government is acting on recommendations to overhaul postgraduate training to meet the needs of the changing population, to produce generalist doctors undergoing shorter broad-based training (Greenaway Review). Only 45 doctors in training were involved in the consultation process. This study aims to obtain a focused perspective on the proposed reforms by doctors in training from across specialities. Design Prospective, questionnaire-based cross-sectional study. Setting/participants Following validation, a 31-item electronic questionnaire was distributed via trainee organisations and Postgraduate Local Education and Training Board (LETB) mailing lists. Throughout the 10-week study period, the survey was publicised on several social media platforms. Results Of the 3603 demographically representative respondents, 69% knew about proposed changes. Of the respondents, 73% expressed a desire to specialise, with 54% keen to provide general emergency cover. A small proportion (12%) stated that current training pathway length is too long, although 86% felt that it is impossible to achieve independent practitioner-level proficiency in a shorter period of time than is currently required. Opinions regarding credentialing were mixed, but tended towards disagreement. The vast majority (97%) felt credentialing should not be funded by doctors in training. Respondents preferred longer placement lengths with increasing career progression. Doctors in training value early generalised training (65%), with suggestions for further improvement. Conclusions This is the first large-scale cross-specialty study regarding the Shape of Training Review. Although there are recommendations which trainees support, it is clear that one size does not fit all. Most trainees are keen to provide a specialist service on an emergency generalist background. Credentialing is a contentious issue; however, we believe removing aspects from curricula into post-Certificate of Completion of Training (CCT) credentialing programmes with shortened specialty training routes only degrades the current consultant expertise, and does not serve the population. Educational needs, not political winds, should drive changes in postgraduate medical education and all stakeholders should be involved.

Association of Surgeons in Training Conference: Belfast 2014

The Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) is a professional body and registered charity working to promote excellence in surgical training for the benefit of junior doctors and patients alike. ASiT is independent of the National Health Service (NHS), Surgical Royal Colleges, and specialty associations and represents trainees in all ten surgical specialties. ASiT was delighted to welcome all four surgical Royal College Presidents and over 650 delegates to Belfast for ASiT 2014. With a theme of Marginal Gains, the conference programme explored collaboration, simulation training and human factors, complimented by debates including the Shape of Training Review (ShOT), several focussed parallel sessions and ten subsidised pre-conference training courses. Almost £4000 was awarded by the incoming President, Mr Vimal Gokani, to delegates across more than 30 prizes for delegates who presented the highest scoring academic work from over 1200 submitted abstracts.