Trials and tribulations of the annual review of competence progression – lessons learned from core medical training in London
Author(s) -
Emily Gowland,
Jonathan Birns,
Catherine Bryant,
Karen L. Ball
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
future healthcare journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2514-6653
pISSN - 2514-6645
DOI - 10.7861/futurehosp.4-2-92
Subject(s) - competence (human resources) , documentation , medical education , curriculum , psychological intervention , core competency , psychology , quality assurance , medicine , computer science , nursing , pedagogy , business , social psychology , external quality assessment , pathology , programming language , marketing
The annual review of competence progression (ARCP) was introduced as a way of keeping records and reviewing satisfactory progress through a medical curriculum for doctors in training. It provides public assurance that doctors are trained to a satisfactory standard and are fit for purpose. A routine external review of the core medical training (CMT) ARCPs in London revealed documentation of satisfactory progression of trainees to the next level of training without the evidence to support their completion of the curriculum. An internal review and series of process interventions were subsequently conducted and implemented to improve the quality and standardisation of the ARCPs. This paper reviews these interventions, discusses the lessons learned from the internal review and highlights issues applicable to any ARCP process.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom