Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Dr Meenakshi Swamy
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0).
Objective: To systematically identify and analyse all published literature relating to the provision of undergraduate education for preparedness in ear, nose and throat (ENT) surgery, as perceived by medical students and clinicians in the UK. Design: Systematic literature review. Data sources: 5 major databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, ERIC, Cochrane and Web of Science. The literature search was conducted from February to April 2015. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Primary research or studies that report on the provision of undergraduate education for preparedness in ENT, from the perspective of medical students and clinicians in the UK. The timescale of searches was limited from 1999 onwards (ie, the past 15 years). Data extraction: The literature search was conducted by 2 independent reviewers. Search terms used involved the combination and variation of 5 key concepts, namely: medical student, clinician, ENT, undergraduate medical education and UK. A data extraction form was designed for and used in this study, based on guidelines provided by the UK National Health Service (NHS) Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Textual narrative synthesis was used for data analysis. Results: A total of 7 studies were included in the final review. 4 main themes were identified: confidence in managing patients, teaching delivery, student assessment and duration of rotations. A consistent finding in this review was that the majority of final year medical students and junior doctors did not feel adequately prepared to practise ENT. Important factors influencing preparedness in ENT included the duration of clinical rotations, the opportunity for hands-on learning and formal assessment. Conclusions: The findings of this review suggest the need for further development of the ENT undergraduate curricula across the UK. However, there is insufficient evidence from which to draw strong conclusions; this in itself is beneficial as it highlights a gap in the existing literature and supports the need for primary research.
Author(s): Ferguson GR, Bacila IA, Swamy M
Publication type: Article
Publication status: Published
Journal: BMJ Open
Year: 2016
Volume: 6
Issue: 4
Print publication date: 01/04/2016
Online publication date: 15/04/2016
Acceptance date: 22/03/2016
Date deposited: 30/08/2017
ISSN (electronic): 2044-6055
Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group
URL: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010054
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010054
PubMed id: 27084273
Altmetrics provided by Altmetric
