JRSM > Volume 102, Number 7 > Pp. 287-293

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Send a Quick Comment Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Quick Comments are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Pereira, E. A. Articles by Dean, B. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

British surgeons' experiences of mandatory online workplace-based assessment

Erlick AC Pereira¹   Benjamin JF Dean²

¹ Nuffield Department of Surgery, University of Oxford and Department of Neurological Surgery The West Wing, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
² Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre Windmill Road, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK

Correspondence to: Benjamin JF Dean bendean1979{at}gmail.com

Objectives An online workplace-based assessment tool, the Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme (ISCP), has become mandatory for all British surgical trainees appointed since August 2007. A compulsory £125 annual trainee fee has also been introduced to fund its running costs. The study sought to evaluate user satisfaction with the ISCP.

Design and setting A total of 539 users across all surgical specialties (including 122 surgeons acting as assessors) were surveyed in late 2008 by online questionnaire regarding their experiences with the ISCP.

Results Sixty-seven percent had used the tool for at least one year. It was rated above average by only 6% for its registration process and only 11% for recording meetings and objectives. Forty-nine percent described its online assessments as poor or very poor, only 9% considering them good or very good. Seventy-nine percent rated the website's user friendliness as average or worse, as did 72% its peer-assessment tool and 61% its logbook of procedures. Seventy-six percent of respondents had carried out paper assessments due to difficulties using the website. Six percent stated that the ISCP had impacted negatively on their training opportunities, 41% reporting a negative impact overall upon their training; only 6% reported a positive impact. Ninety-four percent did not consider the trainee fee good value, only 2% believing it should be paid by the trainee.

Conclusions The performance of the ISCP leaves large numbers of British surgeons unsatisfied. Its assessments lack appropriate evidence of validity and its introduction has been problematic. With reducing training hours, the increased online bureaucratic burden exacerbates low morale of trainees and trainers, adversely impacting potentially upon both competency and productivity.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. Munsch British surgeons' experiences of mandatory online workplace-based assessment - reply to authors J R Soc Med, September 1, 2009; 102(9): 357 - 358. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S.-A. S Price Surgery's flawed e-portfolio BMJ, August 4, 2009; 339(aug04_3): b3142 - b3142. [Full Text]