Cargando…

Can GPs working in secure environments in England re-license using the Royal College of General Practitioners revalidation proposals?

BACKGROUND: Revalidation for UK doctors is expected to be introduced from late 2012. For general practitioners (GPs), this entails collecting supporting information to be submitted and assessed in a revalidation portfolio every five years. The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of GPs...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Coomber, Jane, Charlton, Rodger, Thistlethwaite, Jill E, England, Liz
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3541221/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23253694
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-13-123
_version_ 1782255323012136960
author Coomber, Jane
Charlton, Rodger
Thistlethwaite, Jill E
England, Liz
author_facet Coomber, Jane
Charlton, Rodger
Thistlethwaite, Jill E
England, Liz
author_sort Coomber, Jane
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Revalidation for UK doctors is expected to be introduced from late 2012. For general practitioners (GPs), this entails collecting supporting information to be submitted and assessed in a revalidation portfolio every five years. The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of GPs working in secure environments to collect supporting information for the Royal College of General Practitioners’ (RCGP) proposed revalidation portfolio. METHODS: We invited GPs working in secure environments in England to submit items of supporting information collected during the previous 12 months using criteria and standards required for the proposed RCGP revalidation portfolio and complete a GP issues log. Initial focus groups and initial and follow-up semi-structured face-to-face and telephone interviews were held to explore GPs’ views of this process. Quantitative and qualitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and identifying themes respectively. RESULTS: Of the 50 GPs who consented to participate in the study, 20 submitted a portfolio. Thirty-eight GPs participated in an initial interview, nine took part in a follow-up interview and 17 completed a GP issues log. GPs reported difficulty in collecting supporting information for valid patient feedback, full-cycle clinical audits and evidence for their extended practice role(s) as sessional practitioners in the high population turnover custodial environment. Peripatetic practitioners experienced more difficulty than their institution based counterparts collating this evidence. CONCLUSIONS: GPs working in secure environments may experience difficulties in collecting the newer types of supporting information for the proposed RCGP revalidation portfolio primarily due to their employment status within a non-medical environment and characteristics of the detainee population. Increased support from secure environment service commissioners and employers will be a prerequisite for these practitioners to enable them to re-license using the RCGP revalidation proposals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3541221
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35412212013-01-11 Can GPs working in secure environments in England re-license using the Royal College of General Practitioners revalidation proposals? Coomber, Jane Charlton, Rodger Thistlethwaite, Jill E England, Liz BMC Fam Pract Research Article BACKGROUND: Revalidation for UK doctors is expected to be introduced from late 2012. For general practitioners (GPs), this entails collecting supporting information to be submitted and assessed in a revalidation portfolio every five years. The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of GPs working in secure environments to collect supporting information for the Royal College of General Practitioners’ (RCGP) proposed revalidation portfolio. METHODS: We invited GPs working in secure environments in England to submit items of supporting information collected during the previous 12 months using criteria and standards required for the proposed RCGP revalidation portfolio and complete a GP issues log. Initial focus groups and initial and follow-up semi-structured face-to-face and telephone interviews were held to explore GPs’ views of this process. Quantitative and qualitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and identifying themes respectively. RESULTS: Of the 50 GPs who consented to participate in the study, 20 submitted a portfolio. Thirty-eight GPs participated in an initial interview, nine took part in a follow-up interview and 17 completed a GP issues log. GPs reported difficulty in collecting supporting information for valid patient feedback, full-cycle clinical audits and evidence for their extended practice role(s) as sessional practitioners in the high population turnover custodial environment. Peripatetic practitioners experienced more difficulty than their institution based counterparts collating this evidence. CONCLUSIONS: GPs working in secure environments may experience difficulties in collecting the newer types of supporting information for the proposed RCGP revalidation portfolio primarily due to their employment status within a non-medical environment and characteristics of the detainee population. Increased support from secure environment service commissioners and employers will be a prerequisite for these practitioners to enable them to re-license using the RCGP revalidation proposals. BioMed Central 2012-12-20 /pmc/articles/PMC3541221/ /pubmed/23253694 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-13-123 Text en Copyright ©2012 Coomber et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Coomber, Jane
Charlton, Rodger
Thistlethwaite, Jill E
England, Liz
Can GPs working in secure environments in England re-license using the Royal College of General Practitioners revalidation proposals?
title Can GPs working in secure environments in England re-license using the Royal College of General Practitioners revalidation proposals?
title_full Can GPs working in secure environments in England re-license using the Royal College of General Practitioners revalidation proposals?
title_fullStr Can GPs working in secure environments in England re-license using the Royal College of General Practitioners revalidation proposals?
title_full_unstemmed Can GPs working in secure environments in England re-license using the Royal College of General Practitioners revalidation proposals?
title_short Can GPs working in secure environments in England re-license using the Royal College of General Practitioners revalidation proposals?
title_sort can gps working in secure environments in england re-license using the royal college of general practitioners revalidation proposals?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3541221/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23253694
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-13-123
work_keys_str_mv AT coomberjane cangpsworkinginsecureenvironmentsinenglandrelicenseusingtheroyalcollegeofgeneralpractitionersrevalidationproposals
AT charltonrodger cangpsworkinginsecureenvironmentsinenglandrelicenseusingtheroyalcollegeofgeneralpractitionersrevalidationproposals
AT thistlethwaitejille cangpsworkinginsecureenvironmentsinenglandrelicenseusingtheroyalcollegeofgeneralpractitionersrevalidationproposals
AT englandliz cangpsworkinginsecureenvironmentsinenglandrelicenseusingtheroyalcollegeofgeneralpractitionersrevalidationproposals