Negative themes | Comments |
---|---|
CiPs 9–14 were more difficult to gather evidence and assess | ‘The procedures I found most difficult. Consultants rarely oversee the trainee undertaking medical procedures. In addition, procedures are ‘lumped’ together. It might be more informative if there was a tick list of procedures with associated grades of competency.’ |
‘Research (CiP 11) – if you are not doing any OOP research experience it is difficult to get this competency signed off. If it is such that you need the level of evidence requested then an OOP experience is likely to be required – if it is the case that an understanding of evidence-based medicine and how to understand papers is what is needed then a course is sufficient.’ | |
‘The research and NHS systems CiPs (CiPs 11 and 14) were more difficult and relied mainly on the clinical supervisor's feedback, which was limited for the research CiP. | |
Levels of supervision were not clear / overlap between levels / expectation for each level were not clear | Trainee: ‘I felt the lines were a little blurred between level 3 and 4, as at a junior SpR level you are the senior decision maker on site out of hours and are independent, often with no ‘supervision available quickly’ depending on the situation but that doesn't mean you are ready to CCT.’ |
Trainee: ‘The number of levels is probably appropriate, but the distinction is not always clear and consistent when applied to different domains.’ | |
Trainee: ‘It was difficult to ascertain what exactly each meant – eg trusted to act unsupervised – does this mean unsupervised as an SpR3 (who work for a consultant) or totally unsupervised as an SpR7 approaching CCT? It would be good to clarify what the expected level is for that stage in training and whether they meet or exceed that expectation.’ | |
Educational supervisor: ‘The expectation for each level of training is not clear.’ |
CCT = certificate of completion of training; CiP = capabilities in practice; OOP = out-of-programme; SpR = specialist registrar.