Education, Medical
Conditions
Keywords
ARCP, Surgical Training, Assessment, Qualitative
Brief summary
A Prospective Cross Sectional Questionnaire Study was conducted to evaluate surgical trainees' experiences of the ARCP process in order to identify areas for improvement.
Detailed description
Background: Surgical trainees in the UK and Ireland undergo rigorous formative and summative assessments throughout each placement and appraisal at an Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP). The ARCP evaluates performance during each training year and determines progression to the next year of training. It is critical that the ARCP is a robust and fair process. The Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) sought to evaluate surgical trainees' experiences of the ARCP process in order to identify areas for improvement. Methods: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study was conducted An electronic survey was developed and distributed electronically to the trainee membership of ASiT in the UK and Republic of Ireland. A 57 point survey examined the specifics of one ARCP cycle as well as attitudes to the process in general. Quantitative analysis was performed, along with thematic analysis on the free-text comments.
Interventions
OTHERARCP Process
One Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) cycle. In the U.K., doctors, across all specialities, undergo an Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) to evaluate performance during each training year and determine progression to the next year of training. Similar processes exist in the Republic of Ireland. The process and requirements for ARCP in the UK are specified in the Gold Guide, the Reference Guide for Postgraduate Specialty Training \[1\]. It defines ARCP as a formal process that uses evidence collected by trainees to review and record performance, demonstrate competencies achieved and inform decisions regarding progression in training
Sponsors
The Association of Surgeons in Training
University College Hospital Galway
Study design
Observational model
OTHER
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Must be a trainee member of ASiT * All grades, Deaneries, including less than full-time/academic trainees are eligible for inclusion
Exclusion criteria
• Student members are excluded
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Experiences of Annual Review of Competence and Progression | Oct 2017-March 2018 | Experience of preparation, processes and standards. These will be measured on an anonymous, online survey (Survey monkey) and participants will be asked to rate their experiences of the ARCP using a likert scale. Specific experiences will include preparation for Annual Review of Competence and Progression-timing of decision making and value of the process as an educational tool and contribution of traineers, supervisors and the ARCP panel. Examples of questions are Did you feel your progression was fairly assessed? Possible answers include very fair, fair, neutral, not fair, very unfair |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Face to Face | Oct 2017- March 2018 | Trainees attitudes to a face to face Annual Review of Competence and Progression This will be measured on a likert scale similar to that outlined above (Strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree). There will be space for free text comments on the survey and a thematic analysis will be performed according to the steps of Braun and Clarke on the comments |
Countries
United Kingdom
Outcome results
None listed