Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:17:15.924Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Defining performance levels in undergraduate otolaryngology education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 November 2021

R A Steven ,
S McAleer ,
S E Jones ,
S K Lloyd ,
P M Spielmann ,
N Eynon-Lewis  and
G J Mires
R A Steven*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, UK
S McAleer
Affiliation:
Centre for Medical Education, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, UK
S E Jones
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, Scotland, UK
S K Lloyd
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
P M Spielmann
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, Scotland, UK
N Eynon-Lewis
Affiliation:
Department of ENT, Barts Health care NHS Trust, London, UK
G J Mires
Affiliation:
School of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, UK
*
Author for correspondence: Mr Richard A Steven, Department of Otolaryngology, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, UK E-mail: richardsteven@doctors
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives

This study seeks the opinions of qualified doctors on what they feel medical students should learn about otolaryngology. It aims to identify both the content deemed relevant and the performance levels for medical students in otolaryngology.

Methods

A national survey developed from a content analysis of undergraduate otolaryngology curricula from the UK was undertaken, accompanied by a review of the literature and input from an expert group. Data were collected from a wide range of doctors.

Results

Participants felt that graduating students should be able to: recognise, assess and initiate management for common and life-threatening acute conditions; take an appropriate patient history; and perform an appropriate examination for the majority of otolaryngology clinical conditions but manage only a select few.

Conclusion

This study reports performance levels for otolaryngology topics at an undergraduate level. Participating doctors felt that a higher level of performance should be expected of students treating life-threatening, acute and common otolaryngology conditions.

Keywords

Medical StudentUndergraduateMedical EducationOtolaryngologyEducationNeeds Assessment
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 136 , Issue 1 , January 2022 , pp. 17 - 23
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of J.L.O. (1984) LIMITED.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Mr R A Steven takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

Riley, SC. Student selected components (SSCs): AMEE guide no 46. Med Teach 2009;31:885–94CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Department of Health. Delivering high quality, effective, compassionate care: Developing the right people with the right skills and the right values. A mandate from the Government to Health Education England: April 2013 to March 2015. In: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/203332/29257_2900971_Delivering_Accessible.pdf [18 November 2021]Google Scholar
NHS. Training and Development (GP). In: https://www.healthcareers.nhs.uk/explore-roles/general-practice-gp/training-and-development [18 November 2021]Google Scholar
Shape of Training. Securing the future of excellent patient care: final report of the independent review. In: http://www.shapeoftraining.co.uk/static/documents/content/Shape_of_training_FINAL_Report.pdf_53977887.pdf [18 November 2021]Google Scholar
Harries, RL, Rashid, M, Smitham, P, Vesey, A, McGregor, R, Scheeres, K et al. What shape do UK trainees want their training to be? Results of a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2016;6:e010461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wild, JR, Lambert, G, Hornby, S, Fitzgerald, JE. Emergency cross-cover of surgical specialties: consensus recommendations by the Association of Surgeons in Training. Int J Surg 2013;11:584–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bird, J, Biggs, T, Bennett, W, Reddy, V, Counter, P. Training junior doctors for out-of-hours cover in otolaryngology, are we doing enough? Bull R Coll Surg Engl 2014;96:e14–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khan, MM, Saeed, SR. Provision of undergraduate otorhinolaryngology teaching within General Medical Council approved UK medical schools: what is current practice? J Laryngol Otol 2012;126:340–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mace, AD, Narula, AA. Survey of current undergraduate otolaryngology training in the United Kingdom. J Laryngol Otol 2004;118:217–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lightbody, KA, Wilkie, MD. Current ENT training within the UK. Clin Otolaryngol 2012;37:84–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neil, JF. Otolaryngology in the curriculum. J R Soc Med 1979;72:551–2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lennon, P, O'Donovan, JP, O'Donoghue, S, Fenton, JE. The otolaryngology, head and neck training appraisal questionnaire: a national general practice perspective. Ir J Med Sci 2013;182:609–14CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffiths, E. Incidence of ENT problems in general practice. J R Soc Med 1979;72:740–2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, SJ, McDonald, S. Covering ENT out of hours: how confident are senior house officers? J Laryngol Otol 2006;120:587–90CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frank, JR, Snell, L, Sherbino, J. CanMEDS 2015 Physician Competency Framework. Ottawa: Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, 2015Google Scholar
Scottish Deans' Medical Education Group. The Scottish Doctor: Learning Outcomes for the Medical Undergraduate in Scotland: A Foundation for Competent and Reflective Practitioners, 3rd edn. Dundee: Association for Medical Education in Europe, 2008Google Scholar
Dent, J, Harden, RM. A Practical Guide for Medical Teachers, 4th edn. London: Churchill Livingston/ Elsevier, 2013Google Scholar
Grant, J. Principles of curriculum design. In: Swanwick, E, ed. Understanding Medical Education. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2013;31–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohan, D, Ahern, S, Walsh, K. Defining an anaesthetic curriculum for medical undergraduates. A Delphi study. Med Teach 2009;31:e1–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clayton, R, Perera, R, Burge, S. Defining the dermatological content of the undergraduate medical curriculum: a modified Delphi study. Br J Dermatol 2006;155:137–44CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Von Fragstein, M, Silverman, J, Cushing, A, Quilligan, S, Salisbury, H, Wiskin, C et al. UK consensus statement on the content of communication curricula in undergraduate medical education. Med Educ 2008;42:1100–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carraccio, C, Wolfsthal, SD, Englander, R, Ferentz, K, Martin, C. Shifting paradigms: from Flexner to competencies. Acad Med 2002;77:361–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
ten Cate, O. Entrustability of professional activities and competency-based training. Med Educ 2005;39:1176–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carraccio, C, Englander, R, Gilhooly, J, Mink, R, Hofkosh, D, Barone, MA et al. Building a framework of entrustable professional activities, supported by competencies and milestones, to bridge the educational continuum. Acad Med 2017;92:324–30CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frank, JR, Snell, LS, Cate, OT, Holmboe, ES, Carraccio, C, Swing, SR et al. Competency-based medical education: theory to practice. Med Teach 2010;32:638–45CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dreyfus, SE, Dreyfus, HL. A Five-Stage Model of the Mental Activities Involved in Directed Skill Acquisition. Berkeley: DTIC Document, 1980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dreyfus, SE. The five-stage model of adult skill acquisition. Bull Sci Technol Soc 2004;24:177–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newble, D, Jolly, B, Wakeford, R. The certification and recertification of doctors: issues in the assessment of clinical competence. BMJ 1994;309:1096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steven, RA, Mires, GJ, Lloyd, SKW, McAleer, S. An undergraduate otolaryngology curriculum comparison in the United Kingdom using a curriculum evaluation framework. Clin Otolaryngol 2017;42:963–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloom, BS, ed. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain. New York: McKay, 1956;20–4Google Scholar
Miller, GE. The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Acad Med 1990;65:S63–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Likert, R. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch Psychol 1932;22:55Google Scholar
University of Bristol. Bristol Online Surveys 2016. In: https://www.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/ [29 April 2016]Google Scholar
Mathers, N, Fox, NJ, Hunn, A. Surveys and Questionnaires. NHS Executive Trent, 1998Google Scholar
Wong, A, Fung, K. Otolaryngology in undergraduate medical education. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009;38:38–48CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lloyd, S, Tan, ZE, Taube, MA, Doshi, J. Development of an ENT undergraduate curriculum using a Delphi survey. Clin Otolaryngol 2014;39:281–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carr, MM, Brown, DH, Reznick, RK. Needs assessment for an undergraduate otolaryngology curriculum. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg 1999;120:865–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ganzel, TM, Martinez, SA. Are we teaching medical students what they need to know? Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1989;100:339–44CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
British Medical Association. What is the European Working Time Directive? 2016. In: https://www.bma.org.uk/advice/employment/working-hours/ewtd [27 April 2017]Google Scholar
Gov.uk. Maximum weekly working hours 2017. In: https://www.gov.uk/maximum-weekly-working-hours [18 November 2021]Google Scholar
Sharpe, D, Farboud, A, Trinidade, A. 'Is that the ENT SHO?': concerns over training and experience of juniors expected to cross-cover ENT at night. Clin Otolaryngol 2009;34:275CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, R, Nash, R, Liu, ZW, Singh, A. Epistaxis management: current understanding amongst junior doctors. J Laryngol Otol 2016;130:252–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
ENTUK, Royal College of Surgeons of England. Commissioning Guide: Tonsillectomy. London: Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2016Google Scholar
Hannaford, PC, Simpson, JA, Bisset, AF, Davis, A, McKerrow, W, Mills, R. The prevalence of ear, nose and throat problems in the community: results from a national cross-sectional postal survey in Scotland. Fam Pract 2005;22:227–33CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 1998 Summary: 2000. In: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/ [3 March 2017]Google Scholar
General Medical Council. Outcomes for Graduates. London: General Medical Council, 2015Google Scholar
Simpson, JG, Furnace, J, Crosby, J, Cumming, AD, Evans, PA, Friedman Ben David, M et al. The Scottish doctor--learning outcomes for the medical undergraduate in Scotland: a foundation for competent and reflective practitioners. Med Teach 2002;24:136–43CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Student and Foundation Doctors in Otolaryngology. Ear, Nose and Throat Undergraduate Curriculum 2015. In: http://sfo.entuk.org/services/undergraduate-curriculum [3 March 2017]Google Scholar
Royal College of Surgeons of England. National Undergraduate Curriculum in Surgery. London: Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2015Google Scholar
Cunningham, CT, Quan, H, Hemmelgarn, B, Noseworthy, T, Beck, CA, Dixon, E et al. Exploring physician specialist response rates to web-based surveys. BMC Med Res Methodol 2015;15:32CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
British Medical Association. GP Contract Imposition Survey 2013–2014. London: British Medical Association, 2016Google Scholar
British Medical Association. GP Practice Collaboration Survey 2014. London: British Medical Association, 2016Google Scholar