D Dalili1, J Mackay2, P Robinson3, R Mansour4. 1. Epsom & St Helier's University Hospitals NHS Trust, Dorking Road, Epsom, Surrey KT18 7EG, UK. Electronic address: Danoob.Dalili@nhs.net. 2. Department of Radiology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Colney Lane, Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7UY, UK; Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7UQ, UK. 3. Musculoskeletal X-Ray Department, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Chapel Allerton Hospital, Chapeltown Road, Leeds LS7 4SA, UK; The NIHR Leeds Biomedical Research Centre, Leeds, UK. 4. Department of Radiology, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford University Hospitals, NHS Foundation Trust, Windmill Rd, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK.
Abstract
AIM: To identify the standard of core and subspecialist musculoskeletal (MSK) training across deaneries in the UK. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online survey of 46 questions with responses in Likert scale or dichotomous formats was distributed to members of the Society of Radiologists in training, British Society of Skeletal Radiologists (BSSR), Training Programme Directors and the Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) Junior Radiology Forum representatives for national training schemes across the country. Responses were analysed descriptively with narrative analysis of free-text comments. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-eight participants completed the survey. Forty-six percent (81/178) were core trainees (ST1-3), 47% (84/178) were subspecialist trainees, and 7% (13/178) were newly qualified consultants (<2 years in post). All (178/178) of the participants had a dedicated MSK rotation, with a duration of ≥3 months in 76% (136/178). Only one-third received a dedicated period in MSK ultrasound and only 60% (107/178) had been actively involved in interventional procedures during their training. Overall, 21% (37/178) and 42% (75/178) of participants rated the quality of their MSK training as excellent and good, respectively. The majority (93%, 168/178) thought that MSK training could be improved, especially for ultrasound (62%, 110/178) and interventional computed tomography (CT) or fluoroscopy (57%, 101/178). CONCLUSIONS: There are inconsistencies in MSK training offered in the UK. Although the majority of trainees are satisfied, there were gaps and potential threats to the quality of training. MSK training is witnessing substantial demand from trainees and workforce strategists necessitating tactical investments to standardise and enhance its quality.
AIM: To identify the standard of core and subspecialist musculoskeletal (MSK) training across deaneries in the UK. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online survey of 46 questions with responses in Likert scale or dichotomous formats was distributed to members of the Society of Radiologists in training, British Society of Skeletal Radiologists (BSSR), Training Programme Directors and the Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) Junior Radiology Forum representatives for national training schemes across the country. Responses were analysed descriptively with narrative analysis of free-text comments. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-eight participants completed the survey. Forty-six percent (81/178) were core trainees (ST1-3), 47% (84/178) were subspecialist trainees, and 7% (13/178) were newly qualified consultants (<2 years in post). All (178/178) of the participants had a dedicated MSK rotation, with a duration of ≥3 months in 76% (136/178). Only one-third received a dedicated period in MSK ultrasound and only 60% (107/178) had been actively involved in interventional procedures during their training. Overall, 21% (37/178) and 42% (75/178) of participants rated the quality of their MSK training as excellent and good, respectively. The majority (93%, 168/178) thought that MSK training could be improved, especially for ultrasound (62%, 110/178) and interventional computed tomography (CT) or fluoroscopy (57%, 101/178). CONCLUSIONS: There are inconsistencies in MSK training offered in the UK. Although the majority of trainees are satisfied, there were gaps and potential threats to the quality of training. MSK training is witnessing substantial demand from trainees and workforce strategists necessitating tactical investments to standardise and enhance its quality.