英国 OMFS 顾问和受训人员强烈支持 2008 年研究生医学教育与培训委员会 (PMETB) 对 OMFS 培训的审查所提出的建议。现在是实施这些建议的时候了

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE British Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1016/j.bjoms.2024.02.009
Divya Sharma , James Douglas , Anne Begley , Patrick Magennis , David Koppel
{"title":"英国 OMFS 顾问和受训人员强烈支持 2008 年研究生医学教育与培训委员会 (PMETB) 对 OMFS 培训的审查所提出的建议。现在是实施这些建议的时候了","authors":"Divya Sharma ,&nbsp;James Douglas ,&nbsp;Anne Begley ,&nbsp;Patrick Magennis ,&nbsp;David Koppel","doi":"10.1016/j.bjoms.2024.02.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>When the Postgraduate Medical Education and Training Board’s (PMETB) Review of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS) Training was published in 2008 it contained five recommendations about OMFS training. As yet, none of these recommendations has been delivered. An online survey was designed to assess awareness of the PMETB review and the current views of OMFS trainees and consultants about its recommendations. Replies were invited using email and social media (WhatsApp, Twitter, and Facebook). As a result of using social media no denominator for the response rate was possible. A total of 304 responses were received, eight of which were anonymous. There was strong support for all the OMFS-specific recommendations: 1: the OMFS specialty should remain a dual medical and dental degree specialty (255, 84%); 2: OMFS training should be shortened (283, 93%); 3: OMFS training should start at the beginning of the second degree (203, 67%); 4: there should be a single medical regulator (General Medical Council) for OMFS (258, 85%); and 6: the need for a second Foundation Year should be removed (260, 86%). Other suggestions about improving OMFS training were also made by participants in the survey. There remains strong support within the specialty for the recommendations of the review. This support is present across consultants, specialty trainees, and those aiming for OMFS specialty training. Some of the original legislative obstructions to delivery of the recommendations have been removed by Brexit creating a unique opportunity for them to be delivered.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55318,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266435624000512/pdfft?md5=f646de8d69ffaca356c0c7285f20362c&pid=1-s2.0-S0266435624000512-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"UK OMFS consultants and trainees strongly support the recommendations of the 2008 Postgraduate Medical Education and Training Board (PMETB) Review of Training in OMFS. The time for delivering them is now\",\"authors\":\"Divya Sharma ,&nbsp;James Douglas ,&nbsp;Anne Begley ,&nbsp;Patrick Magennis ,&nbsp;David Koppel\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bjoms.2024.02.009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>When the Postgraduate Medical Education and Training Board’s (PMETB) Review of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS) Training was published in 2008 it contained five recommendations about OMFS training. As yet, none of these recommendations has been delivered. An online survey was designed to assess awareness of the PMETB review and the current views of OMFS trainees and consultants about its recommendations. Replies were invited using email and social media (WhatsApp, Twitter, and Facebook). As a result of using social media no denominator for the response rate was possible. A total of 304 responses were received, eight of which were anonymous. There was strong support for all the OMFS-specific recommendations: 1: the OMFS specialty should remain a dual medical and dental degree specialty (255, 84%); 2: OMFS training should be shortened (283, 93%); 3: OMFS training should start at the beginning of the second degree (203, 67%); 4: there should be a single medical regulator (General Medical Council) for OMFS (258, 85%); and 6: the need for a second Foundation Year should be removed (260, 86%). Other suggestions about improving OMFS training were also made by participants in the survey. There remains strong support within the specialty for the recommendations of the review. This support is present across consultants, specialty trainees, and those aiming for OMFS specialty training. Some of the original legislative obstructions to delivery of the recommendations have been removed by Brexit creating a unique opportunity for them to be delivered.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55318,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266435624000512/pdfft?md5=f646de8d69ffaca356c0c7285f20362c&pid=1-s2.0-S0266435624000512-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266435624000512\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266435624000512","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2008 年,研究生医学教育与培训委员会(PMETB)发布了《口腔颌面外科(OMFS)培训审查报告》,其中包含五项关于口腔颌面外科培训的建议。到目前为止,这些建议还没有一项得到落实。我们设计了一项在线调查,以评估人们对 PMETB 审查的了解程度以及口腔颌面外科受训人员和顾问目前对其建议的看法。通过电子邮件和社交媒体(WhatsApp、Twitter 和 Facebook)邀请他们做出答复。由于使用了社交媒体,因此无法对回复率进行分母计算。共收到 304 份回复,其中 8 份为匿名回复。所有针对 OMFS 的建议都得到了强有力的支持:1:OMFS 专业仍应是医学和牙科双学位专业(255 人,84%);2:OMFS 培训应缩短(283 人,93%);3:OMFS 培训应从第二学位开始(203 人,67%);4:OMFS 应有单一的医学监管机构(医学总会)(258 人,85%);6:应取消第二大学预科年(260 人,86%)。参与调查者还提出了其他关于改进 OMFS 培训的建议。专科内对审查建议的支持度仍然很高。顾问、专科受训人员和以 OMFS 专科培训为目标的人员都表示支持。英国脱欧消除了原来阻碍实施这些建议的一些立法障碍,为实施这些建议创造了独特的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
UK OMFS consultants and trainees strongly support the recommendations of the 2008 Postgraduate Medical Education and Training Board (PMETB) Review of Training in OMFS. The time for delivering them is now

When the Postgraduate Medical Education and Training Board’s (PMETB) Review of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS) Training was published in 2008 it contained five recommendations about OMFS training. As yet, none of these recommendations has been delivered. An online survey was designed to assess awareness of the PMETB review and the current views of OMFS trainees and consultants about its recommendations. Replies were invited using email and social media (WhatsApp, Twitter, and Facebook). As a result of using social media no denominator for the response rate was possible. A total of 304 responses were received, eight of which were anonymous. There was strong support for all the OMFS-specific recommendations: 1: the OMFS specialty should remain a dual medical and dental degree specialty (255, 84%); 2: OMFS training should be shortened (283, 93%); 3: OMFS training should start at the beginning of the second degree (203, 67%); 4: there should be a single medical regulator (General Medical Council) for OMFS (258, 85%); and 6: the need for a second Foundation Year should be removed (260, 86%). Other suggestions about improving OMFS training were also made by participants in the survey. There remains strong support within the specialty for the recommendations of the review. This support is present across consultants, specialty trainees, and those aiming for OMFS specialty training. Some of the original legislative obstructions to delivery of the recommendations have been removed by Brexit creating a unique opportunity for them to be delivered.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
16.70%
发文量
256
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Journal of the British Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons: • Leading articles on all aspects of surgery in the oro-facial and head and neck region • One of the largest circulations of any international journal in this field • Dedicated to enhancing surgical expertise.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Training groups / Instructions to Authors Comment on: Risk prediction of complicated course in patients undergoing major head and neck surgery with free flap reconstruction. Extreme and remarkable adaptations of oral cancer survivors in Sri Lanka. Outcomes of incidental pulmonary nodules detected in oral and oropharyngeal cancer patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1