Abstract
Aims and method For many trainees, an obstacle into psychiatry is the challenge of an imprecise job design and uncertainty about the psychiatrist’s job design across many complex, often ad hoc care situations involving multiple professions and organisations. The UK’s National Health Service (NHS) has introduced inductions for trainee psychiatrists geared towards improving that. Are the induction programmes effective? This article presents an analysis of the outcomes (n = 1115) of inductions about the care programme approach, dual diagnosis, carer support, mental health risk assessment, psychological therapy and suicide risk assessment.Results Univariate analyses of variance revealed a consistent interaction of care programme approach, dual diagnosis, carer support and psychological therapy inductions. Psychiatrists who attend all four inductions have the best perceptions about their job design, strongest teamwork approach, and highest motivation.Clinical implications The NHS and hospitals outside the UK should note these results when prioritising inductions for trainee psychiatrists.
Highlights
Univariate analyses of variance revealed a consistent interaction of care programme approach, dual diagnosis, carer support and psychological therapy inductions
Health systems globally have since increased their spending on human resource development; for instance, the National Health Service (NHS) has outlined a new policy framework which encourages training, professional development, lifelong learning and induction programmes to increase staff motivation, generate positive impressions of the organisation, facilitate team development, and help staff learn about their job role.[4,5]
This is the first analysis of the effectiveness of induction programmes for psychiatrists
Summary
Univariate analyses of variance using SPSS/PASW 18 software for Windows calculated the main and interaction effects of the inductions as independent variables. The first univariate analysis showed the effects of the induction programmes on the psychiatrists’ appraisal of the quality of their job design. The following effects were significant, all of which were interactions: A6B6E = job design: F(1,926) = 5.10, P = 0.024, Z2 = 0.005; A6C6D = job design: F(1,926) = 5.10, P = 0.024, Z2 = 0.005; A6C6E = job design: F(1,926) = 5.63, P = 0.018, Z2 = 0.006; A6D6E = job design: F(1,926) = 6.37, P = 0.012, Z2 = 0.007; A6B6C6D = job design: F(1,926) = 4.23, P = 0.039, Z2 = 0.005; A6D6E6F = job design: F(1,926) = 14.55, P = 0.000, Z2 = 0.015.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
