Search

Introduction In 1996 the University of Liverpool introduced an integrated problem-based learning (PBL) medical curriculum incorporating the recommendations of Tomorrow's Doctors. This paper investigates whether the PRHO (pre-registration house officer) educational supervisors who supervise Liverpool graduates believe that the reformed curriculum is producing house officers who have the competencies outlined by the General Medical Council. Methods Forty-one interviews were arranged with a sample of educational supervisors in the Mersey Deanery area to ascertain their views on the competencies of Liverpool PRHOs. The interviews were tape-recorded, transcribed and analysed. Results The supervisors felt that the PRHOs had been well prepared to work as PRHOs, and compared with traditional graduates they were actually better prepared for the job of PRHO. They saw the PRHOs as competent communicators with improved clinical skills, who had good attitudes, were aware of limitations, were team workers, good at history-taking and examination and had different approaches to finding information. There was a very confusing picture regarding basic knowledge, with some consultants expressing concerns, despite saying they had adequate knowledge to work as PRHOs. It emerged that there was little consensus about the knowledge base of the traditional or PBL graduates or what knowledge level was needed at this stage. Discussion Educational supervisors believe that the reformed curriculum in Liverpool is producing competent PRHOs who have been better prepared for the role of PRHO than previous graduates. It could be that uncertainty over knowledge base may be the price paid for reducing the factual burden and improving preparedness for professional practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims This paper describes the process of validating the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) for use with postgraduate health care professionals. Context The RIPLS questionnaire has proved useful in the undergraduate context, enabling tutors to assess the readiness of students to engage in interprofessional learning (IPL). With the drive in the National Health Service (NHS) to deliver health care in interprofessional teams, it seems logical to ask whether postgraduate education should, or could, be delivered successfully in interprofessional contexts. As a preliminary to undertaking an extended IPL project, the researchers tested the validity of the RIPLS tool in the postgraduate health care context. Method A modified version of the RIPLS questionnaire was administered to all general practitioners, nurses, pharmacists and allied health professionals in the Dundee Local Health Care Cooperative (LHCC) ( n = 799). A total of 546 staff responded (68%). Results Three factors, comprising 23 statements, emerged from the statistical analysis of the survey data, namely, teamwork and collaboration, sense of professional identity and patient-centredness. The internal consistency measure was 0.76. Analysis of variance suggested some key differences between the different professions in respect of the factors. Conclusions The RIPLS questionnaire was validated for use in the postgraduate context, thus providing researchers with a tool for assessing health professionals' attitudes towards interprofessional learning at practice level, community health partnership level or at a national level of education and training. Significant differences between professional groups should be taken into account in designing any interprofessional learning programme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]