Despite the shift towards consultant-led care, many patients with trauma are still seen by junior doctors. Previous research has demonstrated that junior doctors feel unprepared to work in acute care but there is a paucity of recent research in trauma specifically. Thus, a national study is required to investigate the current state of undergraduate trauma teaching and identify specific areas for improvement. Between August and September 2020, a 35-item structured questionnaire was distributed among doctors who graduated from UK medical schools within the last 4 years. The questionnaire retrospectively assessed their experience of trauma teaching at medical school and their confidence to diagnose and manage patients with trauma. 398 responses were recorded from graduates of 39 UK medical schools. With 79.6% reporting only 0–5 hours of bedside trauma teaching and 51.8% reporting less than 20 hours in Accident and Emergency, graduates reported that trauma teaching was deficient compared with other specialties (78.1%). The majority of graduates were not confident in the initial assessment (72.9%) of a patient with trauma and almost all felt that a short course in trauma would be useful (93.7%). 77.4% of students felt that online learning would be beneficial and 92.9% felt that simulation would be useful. There is lack of standardised undergraduate trauma teaching nationally; a formal undergraduate teaching to ensure that new graduates are competent in the management of trauma would be supported by students. It is likely that a blended learning approach, incorporating e-learning with traditional teaching and clinical experience would be well received.
- medical education & training
- trauma management
- orthopaedic & trauma surgery
Statistics from Altmetric.com
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.
JL and PRK are joint first authors.
Contributors All authors made substantial contributions to the research of this paper, assisting in all of the following parts: Guarantor of integrity of the entire study: PRK, JL, NNK, YH and JJL. Study concepts and design: PRK, JL, NNK, YH and JJL. Literature research: PRK, JL, NNK, YH and JJL. Clinical studies: PRK, JL, NNK, YH and JJL. Experimental studies/data analysis: PRK, JL, NNK, YH and JJL. Statistical analysis: PRK, JL, NNK, YH and JJL. Manuscript preparation: PRK, JL, NNK, YH and JJL.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.