Abstract
Introduction:
Local education training boards (LETBs) and deaneries are under pressure to demonstrate delivery of high quality specialist urology training. There is at present no quality tool used routinely to demonstrate this quality regionally or nationally. Differences in training could therefore exist between different regions, and locally between different training units. A trainer/trainee questionnaire tool previously piloted by the specialist advisory committee was used to evaluate urology training posts in the North London LETB over 3 years. The findings were used to compare trainee scores in North London with those in the North West region of England.
Materials and methods:
Questionnaires were circulated electronically to all higher surgical urology trainees in the 18 training units affiliated to the North London LETB. Three years of trainee data were collated, statistically analysed and compared to those collected by Oates and colleagues, looking for any differences in regional trainee scores for higher surgical training posts in North London and North West of England regions.
Results:
The mean trainee response rate was 28 questionnaires per year from all 18 units in the North London region. Combined mean and median scores were 83.3 and 84, respectively. This compares to 86.2 and 88.1 from North West England region comprising eight units. There was no statistically significant difference in scores between the two regions (two-tailed t test, P=0.31).
Conclusion:
There is no statistical difference in trainee scores for the evaluation of urological training posts between the two regions. The questionnaire tool can be used effectively to look at overall differences in training standards between geographically distinct regions from a trainee perspective. Both regions offer higher surgical training with high levels of trainee satisfaction. This questionnaire tool can provide insight into subjective differences in training posts within a region.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
