Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T21:10:39.695Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

WhatsAppTM for CESR: Experience From a Peer Support Group

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2023

Jiann Lin Loo*
Affiliation:
Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Borad, Wrexham, United Kingdom
Deepak Moyal
Affiliation:
Bradford District Care NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, United Kingdom
Martina Musovic
Affiliation:
Cumbria, Northumberland and Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, United Kingdom
Anshu Bhatia
Affiliation:
NHS Lanarkshire, Lanarkshire, United Kingdom
*
*Corresponding author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

Certificate of Eligibility for Specialist Registration (CESR) is an alternative pathway for doctors to join the General Medical Council (GMC) specialist register in the United Kingdom (UK). Despite significant official resources provided online by both the GMC and the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych), a lot of doctors working toward CESR in psychiatry specialties find the system complex and do not fully understand how to start, especially candidates from abroad. Therefore, a WhatsAppTM group has been set up to provide peer support to any doctors who want to achieve CESR in psychiatry specialties. This article is aimed to share the reflective experience of managing the WhatsAppTM peer support group.

Methods

The WhatsAppTM group entitled “CESR Aspirants” was created on 23 April 2020 by four UK speciality doctors. The number had grown to the size of 218 participants on 19 December 2022. Any doctors could join the group via the common link. All questions and inputs were welcomed as long as the professionalism and values of the group were respected. The discussion was analysed and grouped into different themes to understand the common questions.

Results

The participants in the group come from 12 countries. The main themes of discussion include the following: clarification of the official guidelines, exploration of types of primary evidence for different domains, troubleshooting individual challenges, sharing of experience and resources, questions about resources available, recognition of CESR in the international arena, motivation to each other, and validation of others’ frustration. There is a significant heterogeneous level of support from local employers to CESR candidates, ranging from the absence of support due to prioritisation of service delivery to a structured CESR fellowship. Psychotherapy and electroconvulsive therapy emerged to be commonly discussed issues as not all candidates had access to those services in their practice. More questions were asked by doctors practising in the UK rather than candidates from abroad. There were three candidates who obtained their CESR in the group.

Conclusion

CESR requires significant effort from candidates. The repetitive theme in certain aspects of clinical domains reflects the common challenges faced by candidates as a result of limitations at the workplace. Therefore, support from the employer is essential for candidates to be successful in their CESR journey. Ultimately, a successful CESR candidate will mean extra consultant psychiatrist manpower to the employer. The creation of a local fellowship or mentorship programme will likely be helpful.

Type
Education and Training
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NC
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This does not need to be placed under each abstract, just each page is fine.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.