Psychiatric Trainees' Committee

Newsletter July 2008

Contents:

 

  1. Editorial
  2. WPBAs – one year on
  3. Assessments online
  4. National Trainees’ Clinical Experience Survey
  5. Speciality selection in the future
  6. New exam eligibility criteria
  7. Review of the Trainees’ Day at the Annual Meeting
  8. Guide to Postgraduate Training in Psychiatry
  9. PTC newsletter editorial team

 

 

Editorial

 

Welcome to the third e-newsletter of the Psychiatric Trainees’ Committee (PTC) of the Royal College of Psychiatrists.

 

Further information about training issues can be found on our website: www.rcpsych.ac.uk/training/traineessection.aspx  Please feel free to email us at ptc@rcpsych.ac.uk about any training issues – we would also appreciate any feedback about this newsletter so that we can improve subsequent editions.

 

Back to top

 

 

WPBAs – one year on

Dr Andy Brittlebank, Associate Dean for Postgraduate Education

 

The introduction of the new Psychiatry Assessment System in August 2007 means that over the course of six years of training a Specialty Registrar in Psychiatry can expect to receive around 90 hours observation and structured feedback from senior colleagues. This contrasts with the training that my contemporaries and I received. For most of us the only time that senior colleagues saw us interacting with a patient was during the ten minutes’ observed interview in the old Part 2 Examination.

 

What have we learned over the last two years while we have been piloting and implementing Workplace-based Assessments (WPBAs) in psychiatry?

 

I think the answer to this falls under three headings: -

  1. The tension between formative and summative assessment
  2. The potential WPBAs have for being reliable and valid forms of assessment
  3. The gaps in our assessment system
 

Formative versus summative assessment

Doctors have been socialized into a pass/fail examination culture. This is in contrast with our approach to the clinical assessment of patients where we are used to a painstaking process of evidence collection and interpretation from which we draw broad, often narrative-based, formulations that lead to holistic management plans. I suggest that we need to import this methodology to our approach to the assessment of professionalism. Rather than thinking of an item of WPBA as representing a pass or a fail, we should rather reflect on what information this assessment conveys and how this can be used to further improve the doctor’s performance.

 

We have seen from the portfolios that trainees submit for the Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP), and that consultants submit to their annual appraisal, that many doctors are explicitly and conscientiously reflecting on evidence about their performance. These doctors are engaged in a continuous process of quality improvement. I know, however, that in many situations and for all sorts of reasons, people have approached assessment as a chore to be endured or as a bureaucratic exercise to have its boxes ticked. This is sad, because we will lose opportunities to enhance the professionalism of our discipline.

 

The reliability and validity of assessments

We have learned from our piloting of WPBAs in psychiatry that they have robust psychometric properties, especially where a trainee has been assessed by a number of different consultant level assessors. So for example, if a trainee has had Case-based Discussion (CbD) assessments performed by four different consultant assessors, in different clinical situations, this will produce a highly reliable and valid picture of the doctor’s performance. I am most grateful to the trainees and their assessors who took part in the pilot project and I want to assure you that the findings from the pilot studies will be used to inform the development of the assessment system.

 

The gaps

In designing the Assessment System our initial priority was to put a system in place that primarily addressed patient safety especially around the supervision of core (ST1-3) trainees. I readily acknowledge that we have paid less attention to the assessment needs of higher (ST4-6) trainees. It is time to address this shortcoming.

 

The first step we are taking is to pilot a new WPBA tool, the Direct Observation of non-Clinical Skills (DOCS). The DOCS has been designed to provide feedback on a trainee’s performance of higher-level skills, such as chairing meetings, providing supervision, giving evidence at formal hearings and giving psychiatric advice to external agencies. We are working with ten sites around the country and are currently training assessors and trainees in the use of the tool with the aim of starting to collect data after the August changeover.

 

The future

One thing that I think we have all learned in the last couple of years is that nothing stands still. I believe that just as we have a professional duty to continually seek to improve our performance, we also have a duty to improve the performance of the systems around us. So we should seek to develop the quality of our Assessment System. I am grateful to the Psychiatric Trainees’ Committee and to individual trainees for the comments and critical feedback they have given and, I hope, will continue to give to help us in the enterprise of continual improvement.

 

I would leave you to consider an aphorism attributed to the composer Sir Walford Davies; “we are not out to beat each other, but to pace each other on the road to perfection”. Perfection is of course, a destination at which we will never arrive.

 

 

Back to top

 

Assessments online

Dr Amit Malik, Training Policy Advisor

 

Based on this year’s experience of HcAT and extensive feedback from many trainees and trainers, the College has decided to bring the online assessment system in-house in order to make the process more trainee-focussed and enable us to be more responsive to trainees’ and trainers’ concerns. The new system will be referred to as Assessments online to avoid using any more four letter acronyms.

 

The system is expected to go live in August for the next training year. We are currently piloting the new system with assessors and trainees so that we can resolve any difficulties before we launch the system. The new system will have the following salient advantages:

 

  1. The usernames and passwords of all registered trainees and assessors will be preserved. We are currently negotiating with HcAT for the smooth transfer of this information to our system.
  2. The assessments that trainees have completed over the last year will also be preserved and we are in the process of obtaining these from HcAT.
  3. We are redesigning the website to make it easier and more intuitive to navigate.
  4. The assessor registration process and completing assessments will be made much more user-friendly.
  5. College Tutors, Training Programme Directors, Directors of Medical Education and Heads of School will be given access to view their trainees’ progress in the context of WPBA.
  6. Trainees will be able to access and print off live collated reports at any point during the training year.
  7. A responsive system of accessing help with any technical or procedural difficulties will be made available to all users. 

 

The new system will be available at http://training.rcpsych.ac.uk  

Trainees and assessors will be able to access help with the system by e-mailing: support@training.rcpsych.ac.uk 

 

In order to allow the most efficient and prompt response to the majority to queries, e-mailing should be the first step for those with technical difficulties.  If it is not possible to address the query via mail a phone number is available:  0844 800 6516.

 

For queries relating to the WPBA themselves and training issues please contact: cdrummond@rcpsych.ac.uk

 

We are grateful to all of you for your patience and extensive feedback with regards to HcAT over the last year. We also acknowledge that some of you have found the process frustrating and cumbersome as a result of the difficulties with HcAT. We do, however, believe that if implemented properly, an online system is the most efficient way of collating WPBA. We hope that in the future this will be linked to an e-portfolio where these assessments will be recorded alongside a trainee’s other experiences and evidences of competence acquisition. We are working very hard at the College to develop an efficient and user-friendly system and as always would be very keen to receive your feedback so that we can continually make improvements to it.

 

We will send out an email when the system goes live with detailed information about how to use it. Please continue to use the existing HcAT system for any WPBA for now. If you have already registered for HcAT you will not be required to re-register for Assessments online.

 

We thank all trainees for their ongoing cooperation and support.

 

Back to top

 

National Trainees’ Clinical Experience Survey

 

The national training survey will close on August 1st. However, we are still short of the numbers that will be required to give the results good validity.

 

Many thanks to all who have completed the survey to date. To those of you who haven't completed the survey could you please take the 10 minutes required to complete the 24 questions. The survey can be found at:

www.nationaltrainingexperiencesurvey.co.uk

 

Back to top

 

Speciality selection in the future

 

The Medical Training Application Service (MTAS) system attracted widespread criticism from both trainees and trainers.  It resulted in extremely difficult situations for many trainees and their families.  As plans are made for the future of speciality selection it is crucial that trainees are actively involved in the discussions to help ensure that a similar fiasco is not repeated.  The PTC has produced a report considering the options for future selection processes and outlining proposals that are in the best interests of trainees.

It can be found by clicking here (opens as a word file in a new window).


We recently presented this report to the College and a trainee representative will now be included in the working group that has been set up for speciality selection.

 

 

Back to top

 

New exam eligibility criteria

 

The first diet of the new Royal College of Psychiatry exams is now complete. Trainees had raised concerns with the examination eligibility criteria and the criteria have now been revised to take these concerns into account. The new criteria will be effective from 1st January 2009 and the subspecialty areas which will be classed as adult psychiatry are clearly specified. A recommended timeframe is given for the written papers, which is similar to the previous criteria, although all papers can be taken after 12 months post-foundation training. The papers can now be taken in any order, although it is not recommended to do so.

 

The CASC can be taken after 30 months of full time equivalent training, of which a minimum of 24 months should have been in psychiatry. Trainees need to have a minimum of 12 months of adult psychiatry experience and a minimum of 12 months in two or three other psychiatric specialties. A pass in all three written papers is required prior to sitting the CASC and a pass in Paper 3 can be banked for 635 days from the day that the Paper 3 results are released. The other requirement for trainees in a programme approved by PMETB is that they must have evidence of successful completion of their Annual Review of Competence and Progression documentation. Further guidance is awaited for flexible trainees.

 

A copy of the full guidance is available by clicking here.

 

The written paper at a glance guides can be viewed by clicking here.

The CASC at a glance guides can be viewed by clicking here.

 

Please note, the above files will all open in a new window.

 

Back to top

 

Report of Trainees’ Day at the College AGM 2nd July 2008

Meinou Simmons, PTC member

 

The Trainees’ Day 2008 presented an interesting and varied programme of debates and informative lectures. The day was split into four sessions described below:

 

Global challenges facing psychiatric training: an international perspective

It was refreshing and interesting to hear of trainees’ experiences from foreign countries, and compare them to our UK experiences. The original programme was altered slightly, but this did not detract from the quality of the perspectives offered. We heard from Olivier Andlauer, a delegate from France, where a ‘laissez faire’ approach to postgraduate training (minus formal exams or assessments), manages to produce the highest patient satisfaction in Europe! We heard from the Czech Republic where psychiatric practice is still predominantly based in Victorian asylums and trainees are paid little more than a UK teenager’s pocket money. We were also fortunate to have Abigail Donovan, from the US American Psychiatric Association Board of Trustees present. The reports of difficulties with US training with almost permanent on calls (with 80 hour weeks being considered a luxury), and constant weekly battles with untrained Insurance company staff really made UK trainees thank their lucky stars for UK training and think twice about moaning about our lot!

 

Debate: ‘This house believes that there is no place for any Mental Health Act in modern society’

Well attended by trainees and consultants alike, this was an interesting and well argued debate. Dr Anthony Zigmond and Dr Julian Beezhold presented an argument supporting the motion based on humanitarian grounds. It was Dr Zigmond’s view that an altered capacity act would be sufficient and more humane, as used in several countries, and would alter the balance of power in favour of patients. Opposing the motion were Professor Tom Fahy and Dr Arun Chopra. They articulated the reasons why a civilised society needs to retain its Mental Health Act in order to maintain safety and retain professional responsibility for patients who are at risk. They also explained why in their view a Mental Capacity Act alone would not be sufficient to maintain order. The vote was cast against the motion.

 

Workplace based assessments: a year on

The important aspects to this timely and important topic were well articulated by those most informed within the College. Dr Andrew Brittlebank, Dr Amit Malik and Dr Clare Oakley helped to present the main advantages and difficulties of this new compulsory part of trainees’ portfolios. They explained that problems with the unwieldy HCAT-online system have led the College to transfer across to their own in-house system from August. Dr Brittlebank showed statistics of the pilot programmes developed within the College. Of interest was the fact that the degree of statistical validity of assessments improves significantly with number of assessors: so the take home message was for trainees to get as many different assessors as possible. Consultants had mixed experiences of using these tools, and although some felt they had been a positive move, some felt the tools would not necessarily be useful in helping to identify a failing trainee.

 

Debate: ‘This house believes that the quality of psychiatric postgraduate education will decline unless the College quality assurance visits are reinstated’

In this debate we had the humorous and unusual situation of the main supporter of the motion, Professor Rob Howard, not actually supporting the motion as it stood. Instead the new Dean, enthusiastically presented the case for a hybrid model of College visits with PMETB input and independent quality control. He wanted to revive all the good parts of the College visits i.e. ‘looking in all the dark corners of all training units’, however recognising that it is not possible to go back to such visits without PMETB input. Dr Greg Lydall, also supporting, expressed frustration of the ‘watered down’ less rigorous regulation offered so far by PMETB. Opposing the motion were Mrs Patricia le Rolland Director of Quality for PMETB, and Dr Ross Overshott, new consultant and playwright. Mrs le Rolland explained the time for in-house regulation has passed, and she explained the importance of an independent regulator to work alongside the College in carrying out its function. Dr Overshott also eloquently spoke of the old cronyism of the old College visits, where trainees were not always fully able to speak independently due to fear of tarnished reputations. The conclusion seemed to be to create a more harmonised model of regulation with the independence offered by PMETB but with College input to push for psychiatric expertise and increased rigour.

 

Back to top

 

Guide to Postgraduate Training in Psychiatry

To ensure that trainees and trainers have easy access to the information they need, the PTC have taken a lead in developing a guide to the new training system.  This guide has now been published by the College as Occasional Paper 65 and was distributed to all members with the July journals.  It provides an overview of postgraduate training in psychiatry and sets out standards for this training.  If you have not received a copy it can be found at:

www.rcpsych.ac.uk/files/pdfversion/OP65.pdf (opens in a new window).

 

Back to top

 

PTC newsletter editorial team

Christian Hosker, Newsletter editor

Elena Baker-Glenn, Website editor

Ollie White, Chair

Clare Oakley, Vice Chair

Paul Henderson, Honorary Secretary

 

 

 

Back to top

 

Back to trainees' home page

 

Page last updated on 17th July 2008

© 2009 Royal College of Psychiatrists