Education, MedicalNCT03718481
Perceptions of the Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) in Surgical Training in the UK and Ireland
An observational study of Education, Medical, run by University College Hospital Galway at 1 site in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
A Prospective Cross Sectional Questionnaire Study was conducted to evaluate surgical trainees' experiences of the ARCP process in order to identify areas for improvement. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Education, Medical
- What is being tested?
- ARCP Process
- How many people
- 600 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- 1 Oct 2017to 31 Mar 2018
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: Surgical Trainees in the UK and Ireland who are members of ASiT
Who may be able to join
- Must be a trainee member of ASiT
- All grades, Deaneries, including less than full-time/academic trainees are eligible for inclusion
Who cannot join
- Student members are excluded
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Perceptions of the Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) in Surgical Training in the UK and Ireland: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.
A Prospective Cross Sectional Questionnaire Study was conducted to evaluate surgical trainees' experiences of the ARCP process in order to identify areas for improvement.
Read the detailed description
Background: Surgical trainees in the UK and Ireland undergo rigorous formative and summative assessments throughout each placement and appraisal at an Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP). The ARCP evaluates performance during each training year and determines progression to the next year of training. It is critical that the ARCP is a robust and fair process. The Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) sought to evaluate surgical trainees' experiences of the ARCP process in order to identify areas for improvement.
Methods: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study was conducted An electronic survey was developed and distributed electronically to the trainee membership of ASiT in the UK and Republic of Ireland. A 57 point survey examined the specifics of one ARCP cycle as well as attitudes to the process in general. Quantitative analysis was performed, along with thematic analysis on the free-text comments.
- Conditions
- Education, Medical
- Being tested
- ARCP Process
- Keywords
- ARCP, Surgical Training, Assessment, Qualitative
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
ARCP ProcessOther
One Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) cycle. In the U.K., doctors, across all specialities, undergo an Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) to evaluate performance during each training year and determine progression to the next year of training. Similar processes exist in the Republic of Ireland. The process and requirements for ARCP in the UK are specified in the Gold Guide, the Reference Guide for Postgraduate Specialty Training [1]. It defines ARCP as a formal process that uses evidence collected by trainees to review and record performance, demonstrate competencies achieved and inform decisions regarding progression in training
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Surgical Trainees | Trainee membership of the Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) in the UK and the Republic of Ireland Receives: Other: ARCP Process |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Experiences of Annual Review of Competence and Progression
Experience of preparation, processes and standards. These will be measured on an anonymous, online survey (Survey monkey) and participants will be asked to rate their experiences of the ARCP using a likert scale. Specific experiences will include preparation for Annual Review of Competence and Progression-timing of decision making and value of the process as an educational tool and contribution of traineers, supervisors and the ARCP panel. Examples of questions are Did you feel your progression was fairly assessed? Possible answers include very fair, fair, neutral, not fair, very unfair
Measured: Oct 2017-March 2018
Secondary outcomes (1)
Face to Face
Trainees attitudes to a face to face Annual Review of Competence and Progression This will be measured on a likert scale similar to that outlined above (Strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree). There will be space for free text comments on the survey and a thematic analysis will be performed according to the steps of Braun and Clarke on the comments
Measured: Oct 2017- March 2018
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Oct 2018
- Study start1 Oct 2017
- Primary completion31 Mar 2018
- Study completion31 Mar 2018
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Education, MedicalStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Other
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 600 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University College Hospital Galway
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The Association of Surgeons in Training
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Deirdre Nally, University College Hospital Galway
- Investigators
- Deirdre Nally, MCH, Principal investigator, The Association of Surgeons in Training
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03718481
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- ASiT ARCP
- Status last verified
- Oct 2018
- First submitted
- 20 Oct 2018
- Last updated
- 29 Oct 2018
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 29 Oct 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Perceptions of the Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) in Surgical Training in the UK and Ireland: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03718481
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- ASiT ARCP
- Conditions
- Education, Medical
- Keywords
- ARCP, Surgical Training, Assessment, Qualitative
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 600 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University College Hospital GalwayUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The Association of Surgeons in Training
- Study start
- 1 Oct 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Mar 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Mar 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 24 Oct 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
A Prospective Cross Sectional Questionnaire Study was conducted to evaluate surgical trainees' experiences of the ARCP process in order to identify areas for improvement.
Detailed description
Background: Surgical trainees in the UK and Ireland undergo rigorous formative and summative assessments throughout each placement and appraisal at an Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP). The ARCP evaluates performance during each training year and determines progression to the next year of training. It is critical that the ARCP is a robust and fair process. The Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) sought to evaluate surgical trainees' experiences of the ARCP process in order to identify areas for improvement.
Methods: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study was conducted An electronic survey was developed and distributed electronically to the trainee membership of ASiT in the UK and Republic of Ireland. A 57 point survey examined the specifics of one ARCP cycle as well as attitudes to the process in general. Quantitative analysis was performed, along with thematic analysis on the free-text comments.
Study design
- Observational model
- Other
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Surgical Trainees | – | Other: ARCP ProcessTrainee membership of the Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) in the UK and the Republic of Ireland |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Surgical Trainees in the UK and Ireland who are members of ASiT
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Must be a trainee member of ASiT
- All grades, Deaneries, including less than full-time/academic trainees are eligible for inclusion
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Student members are excluded
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| ARCP ProcessOne Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) cycle. In the U.K., doctors, across all specialities, undergo an Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) to evaluate performance during each training year and determine progression to the next year of training. Similar processes exist in the Republic of Ireland. The process and requirements for ARCP in the UK are specified in the Gold Guide, the Reference Guide for Postgraduate Specialty Training [1]. It defines ARCP as a formal process that uses evidence collected by trainees to review and record performance, demonstrate competencies achieved and inform decisions regarding progression in training | Other | Surgical Trainees |
Primary outcome
Experiences of Annual Review of Competence and Progression
Time frame: Oct 2017-March 2018
Experience of preparation, processes and standards. These will be measured on an anonymous, online survey (Survey monkey) and participants will be asked to rate their experiences of the ARCP using a likert scale. Specific experiences will include preparation for Annual Review of Competence and Progression-timing of decision making and value of the process as an educational tool and contribution of traineers, supervisors and the ARCP panel. Examples of questions are Did you feel your progression was fairly assessed? Possible answers include very fair, fair, neutral, not fair, very unfair
1 secondary outcome
Face to Face
Time frame: Oct 2017- March 2018
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 29 Oct 2018.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Education, Medical
Not yet recruiting
AI Smart Glasses Feedback for Intubation Training in Medical Students
Intubation, Intratracheal, Medical Education
Recruiting
Linking Education, Produce Provision, and Community Referrals to Improve Diabetes Care (LINK)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Nutrition Poor
Not yet recruiting
Title of Study: Anesthesiologists' Learning Curves for Ultrasound Assessment of Difficult Airway
Airway Ultrasound, Difficult Airway Management
Not yet recruiting
Comparing the Efficacy of a Conversational Agent (QuitBot) Versus Standard Health Education on Smoking Cessation Among Medical Students in Cairo University
Conversational Agent, Smoking Cessation
Not yet recruiting
Generative AI-Assisted Personalized Feedback for Laparoscopic Skill Learning in Medical Undergraduates
Medical Education
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Deirdre Nally, MCH principal investigator
The Association of Surgeons in Training
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Education, Medical, run by University College Hospital Galway at 1 site in United Kingdom.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 29 Oct 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United Kingdom. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Experiences of Annual Review of Competence and Progression (time frame: Oct 2017-March 2018). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 29 Oct 2018.