Psychiatric Bulletin (2009) 33: 309-312. doi: 10.1192/pb.bp.108.019737
© 2009 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lydall, G. J.
Right arrow Articles by Bourke, J. H.
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Lydall, G. J.
Right arrow Articles by Bourke, J. H.

Education & training

Rationalising medical careers

Gregory J. Lydall, ST4 General Adult Psychiatry

Highgate Mental Health Centre, Camden & Islington Mental Health Trust, London N19 5NX, email: grogL{at}doctors.org.uk

Julius H. Bourke, ST4 General Adult Psychiatry

The Maudsley Hospital, South London and The Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London

Declaration of interest

Both authors are Higher Trainees in London. G.J.L. writes in his personal capacity as a co-opted member of the Psychiatric Trainees Committee.

Abstract

This article assesses the quality of higher psychiatric training opportunities under Modernising Medical Careers (MMC) and compares them with the existing specialist registrar (SpR) grade; the UK psychiatric educational literature is reviewed, and trainee concerns reported. Anecdotal reports of higher training losses under MMC suggest disparity between specialty training year 4 (ST4) and the first SpR year. The roles, controversies and losses of protected clinical special interest sessions and the research day are reviewed. UK psychiatric literature notes under-utilisation and poor supervision of these highly valued protected training sessions, with suggestions for improvement. The sacrifice of protected training to service provision may have implications for training quality, leading to under-trained consultants in the long term, to the detriment of patients.