首页> 外文期刊>Health Science Reports >Could the UK Foundation Programme training post allocation process result in regional variations in the knowledge and skills of Foundation doctors? A cross‐sectional study
【24h】

Could the UK Foundation Programme training post allocation process result in regional variations in the knowledge and skills of Foundation doctors? A cross‐sectional study

机译:英国基金会计划培训岗位分配过程会导致基金会医生的知识和技能的区域变化吗?横断面研究

获取原文
       

摘要

Background and Aims The allocation of medical school graduates to Foundation Schools (post‐qualification training, organized at regional level) in the United Kingdom uses a ranking process that takes into account educational performance at medical school and performance on a situational judgment test (SJT). We aimed to compare the performance of United Kingdom graduates allocated to different United Kingdom Foundation School according to three metrics: educational performance measure (EPM), SJT, and prescribing safety assessment (PSA). Methods We used a cross‐sectional study design using data from the UK Medical Education Database, studying 19 United Kingdom Foundation School groups. A total of 33?730 graduates from United Kingdom medical schools in the period 2014 to 2018 (inclusive) who started Foundation Training in August 2018 or earlier were included in the study, excluding those allocated to the Academic Foundation Programme or the Armed Forces Deanery. The outcomes were within‐year standardized mean scores (by Foundation School) on the EPM, SJT, and PSA. Results There was a significant difference between Foundation Schools in the Educational Performance Measure ( F = 401, P ?.001), SJT ( F = 213, P ?.001), and PSA ( F = 95, P ?.001). Tukey‐Kramer pairwise comparisons between Foundation Schools showed a very high percentage of statistical significance (78%, 402/513 comparisons). The Cohen's d effect size for the difference in means and Tukey‐Kramer 95% confidence intervals between the Foundation Schools with the highest (North West Thames) and lowest (West Midlands North) means were 1.92 (1.77‐2.07) for the EPM, 1.59 (1.44‐1.73) for the SJT, and 0.94 (0.79‐1.09) for the PSA. Conclusion There is a statistically significant difference between the knowledge and skills of doctors (as measured by the three metrics used in this study) entering the Foundation Programme in different Foundation Schools. It is less clear whether this has an impact on patient care and thus is unfair from the perspective of the patient.
机译:背景和旨在将医学院毕业生分配到英国的基础学校(在区域一级组织的资格后培训,在区域一级组织)使用了一个排名进程,这些过程将考虑到医学院的教育绩效和在情境判决测试中的表现(SJT) 。我们的旨在根据三个指标对英国毕业生分配给不同英国基金会学校的绩效:教育绩效措施(EPM),SJT和处方安全评估(PSA)。方法采用来自英国医学教育数据库数据的横断面研究设计,研究19个英国基金会学校团体。 2014年至2018年至2018年至2018年期间的英国医学院共有33次毕业生,他们于2018年8月或更早的培训中始于本研究,不包括分配给学术基础计划的人或武装部队取消。结果是在EPM,SJT和PSA上的日本标准化平均分子(基础学校)。结果教育绩效措施基础学校之间存在显着差异(F = 401,P <α.001),SJT(F = 213,P <β.001)和PSA(F = 95,P <2。 001)。 Tukey-Kramer在基础学校之间的成对比较表现出非常高的统计显着性(78%,402/513比较)。 COHEN的D效应规模为差异和TUKEY-KRAMER的差异95%,基础学校与最高(西部泰晤士河)和最低(西米德兰兹北)手段的基础学校之间的置信区间为1.92(1.77-2.07),为1.59 (1.44-1.73)为SJT,0.94(0.79-1.09)的PSA。结论医生的知识和技能之间存在统计学上的差异(通过本研究中使用的三个指标来衡量)进入不同基础学校的基础计划。这不清楚这是否对患者护理产生了影响,因此从患者的角度来看是不公平的。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号