OGBN O04 Upper Gastrointestinal Training in the UK & Ireland – a Roux Group Study

Abstract

Abstract Background Surgical training programmes in the United Kingdom and Ireland (UK&I) are in a transition period evidenced by new surgical curricula. This study is the first to collate the opinions of UK&I trainee and consultant surgeons regarding the current Upper Gastrointestinal (UGI) training model. Methods A questionnaire was developed and distributed via national UGI societies and the social media platform, Twitter. A total of 241 responses were received with all UK&I regions represented. Results The median time to Certificate of Completion of Training (CCT) of 13 years was considered reasonable (50.2%), however the majority (67.2%) found training to be unfocused. The suggested targets for publications, presentations and audits were 3–5 (trainee vs consultant <3 vs 3–5, p<0.001), <3 (<3 vs 3–5, p=0.002) and 3–5 (<3 vs 3–5, p<0.001) respectively. The majority (61.9%) considered a higher academic degree advantageous but felt it should not be compulsory. Interestingly, most respondents (63.5%) had or planned to undertake one. Crucially, there were geographical discrepancies in access to training, particularly in bariatrics, robotic surgery, and endoscopy. Proficiency in diagnostic endoscopy was deemed essential for CCT and consultant practice (81.7% and 67.6% respectively). The current index UGI operative requirements were felt to be achievable (87.6%) but inadequate for day one consultant practice (74.7%), an opinion shared by both the trainee and consultant groups (p=0.662). Reassuringly, most respondents (76.3%) deemed there to be a role for on-the-job operative training following consultant appointment. Post-CCT fellowships were not considered necessary for consultant appointment, however the majority (73.6%) again recognised its advantage. Conclusions While variations were seen in the opinions of trainee and consultant surgeons, the current CCT requirements as outlined by the Joint Committee on Surgical Training are consistent with the overall perspective of the UGI community. Areas for improvement include flexibility in geographical working and provisions for endoscopy training, to ensure equal access.