Maintaining standards in surgical training: how effective is the accreditation by the Specialist Advisory Committee in the United Kingdom?
In order to assess the efficacy of inspection and accreditation by the Specialist Advisory Committee for higher surgical training in orthopaedic surgery and trauma, seven training regions with 109 hospitals and 433 Specialist Registrars were studied over a period of two years. There were initial deficiencies in a mean of 14.8% of required standards (10.3% to 19.2%). This improved following completion of the inspection, with a mean residual deficiency in 8.9% (6.5% to 12.7%.) Overall, 84% of standards were checked, 68% of the units improved and training was withdrawn in 4%. Most units (97%) were deficient on initial assessment. Moderately good rectification was achieved but the process of follow-up and collection of data require improvement. There is an imbalance between the setting of standards and their implementation. Any major revision of the process of accreditation by the new Post-graduate Medical Education and Training Board should recognise the importance of assessment of training by direct inspection on site, of the relationship between service and training, and the advantage of defining mandatory and developmental standards.
Jain
N
N
Accident and Emergency Medicine, Cumberland Infirmary, Carlisle CA2 7HY, UK.
Willett
K M
KM
D000068:Accreditation / Q000458:organization & administration / Q000592:standards*; D002983:Clinical Competence; D004503:Education, Medical, Graduate / Q000592:standards*; D008505:Medical Staff, Hospital / Q000193:education; D009985:Orthopedics / Q000193:education* / Q000592:standards; D006113:United Kingdom