Article Text

PDF
FRCS first pass variance: deanery and specialty contrariety
  1. Chris Brown1,
  2. Tarig Abdelrahman1,
  3. John Pollitt1,
  4. Mark Holt1,
  5. Wyn G Lewis1,2
  1. 1Wales Post Graduate Medical and Dental Education Deanery, School of Surgery, Cardiff, UK
  2. 2Upper GI Surgery, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK
  1. Correspondence to Professor Wyn G Lewis, Wales Deanery Specialty School of Surgery, University Hospital of Wales, Heath Park, Cardiff CF14 4XW, UK; wyn.lewis4{at}wales.nhs.uk

Abstract

Background FRCS exit examination success may be interpreted as a surrogate marker for UK Deanery-related training quality. The aim of this study was to evaluate relative FRCS examination pass rates related to Deanery and Surgical Specialty.

Methods Joint Committee on Surgical Training-published examination first attempt pass rates were scrutinised for type I higher surgical trainees and outcomes compared related to Deanery and Surgical Specialty.

Results Of 9363 FRCS first attempts, 3974 were successful (42.4%). Median and mean pass rates related to Deanery were 42.1% and 30.7%, respectively, and ranged from 26.7% to 45.6%. Median (range) pass rates by specialty were urology 76.3% (60%–100%), trauma and orthopaedic surgery 74.7% (58.2%–100%), general surgery 70.0% (63.1%–86%), ENT 62.5% (50%–100%), cardiothoracic surgery 50.0% (25%–100%), oral and maxillofacial surgery 50% (40.0%–100%), neurosurgery 50% (22.7%–100%), plastic surgery 47.6% (30.0%–100%) and paediatric surgery 25% (16.7%–100%). Significant variance was observed across all specialties and deaneries (p=0.001).

Conclusion As much as threefold variance exists related to FRCS examination first attempt success, trainees should be aware of this spectrum when preferencing deaneries during national selection.

  • Surgery
View Full Text

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Contributors CB: data collection, write-up and submission. TA: data collection, data analysis. JP: critical revision of the article. MH: critical revision of the article. WL: oversaw project, final approval prior to submission.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.