BACKGROUND: Concerns exist amongst gastroenterology trainees regarding the quality of teaching, training and supervision. Gastroenterology Specialist Registrars were surveyed to obtain a wider perspective from the trainee body. AIMS: To gather data on the extent and quality of teaching, training and supervision in outpatient clinics, on ward rounds and in endoscopy. METHODS: A semi-structured questionnaire sent to all trainees in training posts in England and Wales. RESULTS: The respondents were evenly spread throughout the years of the training programme. Out of 169 trainees, 68 were never, rarely or not often taught on ward rounds, 92/168 trainees never, rarely or not often discussed new outpatients and only 13/170 trainees discussed review patients frequently or all the time. The quality of teaching was rated as "Quite good-Excellent" by 91/170 and "so-so-very poor" by 79/170. Endoscopic training and supervision were inconsistent, with 76/170 being taught "frequently-all of the time," 39 taught "about half the time," and 53 "not often-never" for procedures in which they were still under training. CONCLUSIONS: Teaching and training in gastroenterology are variable both in quality and quantity. Of particular concern, supervision for endoscopy is often inadequate or absent. There are many opportunities to improve our teaching and training in gastroenterology.
BACKGROUND: Concerns exist amongst gastroenterology trainees regarding the quality of teaching, training and supervision. Gastroenterology Specialist Registrars were surveyed to obtain a wider perspective from the trainee body. AIMS: To gather data on the extent and quality of teaching, training and supervision in outpatient clinics, on ward rounds and in endoscopy. METHODS: A semi-structured questionnaire sent to all trainees in training posts in England and Wales. RESULTS: The respondents were evenly spread throughout the years of the training programme. Out of 169 trainees, 68 were never, rarely or not often taught on ward rounds, 92/168 trainees never, rarely or not often discussed new outpatients and only 13/170 trainees discussed review patients frequently or all the time. The quality of teaching was rated as "Quite good-Excellent" by 91/170 and "so-so-very poor" by 79/170. Endoscopic training and supervision were inconsistent, with 76/170 being taught "frequently-all of the time," 39 taught "about half the time," and 53 "not often-never" for procedures in which they were still under training. CONCLUSIONS: Teaching and training in gastroenterology are variable both in quality and quantity. Of particular concern, supervision for endoscopy is often inadequate or absent. There are many opportunities to improve our teaching and training in gastroenterology.
Authors: Elizabeth Ratcliffe; Sharmila Subramaniam; Wee Sing Ngu; Susan McConnell; Ian L P Beales; Raymond McCrudden; Geoff V Smith; Christopher Wells Journal: Frontline Gastroenterol Date: 2021-02-22