You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Education and learning
Anaesthetic National Teaching Programme for Students (ANTPS)
  1. Saskia K Wicks1,
  2. Prakrit Raj Kumar2,
  3. Ranya Vardini Kumar3,
  4. Stella Arthur-Quarm4,
  5. Manolis Gavalas5
  1. 1Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  2. 2Lister Hopsital, East and North Hertfordshire, NHS Foundation Trust, Stevenage, UK
  3. 3University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK
  4. 4Great Western Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Swindon, UK
  5. 5University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Saskia K Wicks, Barnet Hospital, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, London, UK; saskia.wicks1{at}nhs.net

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly undermined undergraduate anaesthetic teaching in spite of the vital role of the specialty against the pandemic. Anaesthetic National Teaching Programme for Students (ANTPS) was designed to meet the evolving needs of undergraduates and tomorrow’s doctor by standardising anaesthetic training, preparing for final exams and equipping competencies vital for doctors of all grades and specialties. Our Royal College of Surgeons England-accredited University-College-Hospital-affiliated programme consisted of six-biweekly sessions were delivered online by anaesthetic trainees. Prerandomised and postrandomised session-specific multiple-choice questions (MCQs) assessed students’ improvement in knowledge. Anonymous feedback forms were provided to students after each session and 2 months following the programme. 3743 student feedback forms (92.2% of attendees) across 35 medical-schools were recorded. There was a mean improvement in test score (0.94±1.27, p<0.001). 313 students completed all six sessions. Based on 5-point Likert scale, students who completed the programme showed an improvement in their confidence in knowledge and skills to face common foundation challenges (1.59±1.12, p<0.001) and thus felt better prepared for life as junior doctors (1.60±1.14, p<0.001). With an increase in confidence in students to pass their MCQs, Observed Structured Clinical Examinations and case-based discussion assessments, 3525 students stated they would recommend ANTPS to other students. Unprecedented COVID-19 factors impacting training, positive student feedback and extensive recruitment, demonstrate that our programme is an indispensable learning resource which standardises anaesthetic undergraduate education nationally, prepares undergraduates for their anaesthetic and perioperative exams and lays strong foundations for implementation of clinical skills required by all doctors, to optimise training and patient care.

  • MEDICAL EDUCATION & TRAINING
  • EDUCATION AND TRAINING
  • ANAESTHETICS
  • SURGERY

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2021-141353

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    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.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • SKW and PRK are joint first authors.

    • Contributors Guarantor of integrity of the entire study: SKW, PRK, RVK, SA-Q and MG. Study concepts and design: SKW, PRK and MG. Literature research: SKW, PRK, RVK, SA-Q and MG. Clinical studies: SKW, PRK and MG. Experimental studies/data analysis: SKW, PRK, RVK, SA-Q and MG. Statistical analysis: SKW, PRK, RVK, SA-Q and MG. Manuscript preparation: SKW, PRK, RVK, SA-Q and MG. Manuscript editing: SKW, PRK, RVK, SA-Q and MG. Manuscript revision: SKW, PRK, RVK, SA-Q and MG.

    • 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.