Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMahay, Usman
dc.contributor.authorJenkins, Paul
dc.contributor.authorWatkins, Linda
dc.contributor.authorMandal, Indrajeet
dc.contributor.authorLewis, Omotolani
dc.contributor.authorHarborne, Katrina Elizabeth
dc.contributor.authorPatel, Shian
dc.contributor.authorReicher, John
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Wing Yan
dc.contributor.authorZhong, Jim
dc.contributor.authorHamady, Mohamad
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-11T15:43:27Z
dc.date.available2023-10-11T15:43:27Z
dc.date.issued2023-09-25
dc.identifier.citationMahay U, Jenkins P, Watkins L, Mandal I, Lewis O, Harborne KE, Patel S, Reicher J, Liu WY, Zhong J, Hamady M. Interventional radiology training in the UK: a view from within-a national survey. Br J Radiol. 2023 Nov;96(1151):20230039. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20230039. Epub 2023 Sep 25. PMID: 37747294; PMCID: PMC10607392.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0007-1285
dc.identifier.eissn1748-880X
dc.identifier.doi10.1259/bjr.20230039
dc.identifier.pmid37747294
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14200/2507
dc.description.abstractObjective: Interventional radiology (IR) training in the UK has evolved since recognition as a subspecialty in 2010 and introduction of a new curriculum in 2021. The changing landscape, increasing workload and COVID-19 have affected training. The purpose of this study was to review trainees' perspectives on training and develop strategies to further improve training. Methods: Online survey approved by the British Society of Interventional Radiology Council distributed to British Society of Interventional Radiology Trainee members between 9 March 22 and 25 March 2022. The survey was open to all UK based ST4-6 IR trainees and fellows. Descriptive and thematic analysis was undertaken. Results: 43 responses were received from 17/19 UK training regions. Females represented 10% (4/41) and 5% (2/43) less than full time (LTFT) trainees. 82% (31/38) felt their curriculum was suitable for their training and 28/38 (74%) were satisfied with IR training. Vascular IR, Interventional Oncology, paediatrics and stroke thrombectomy were identified as areas of training desiring improvement. 45% (18/40) stated exposure to IR led clinics and 17.5% (7/40) to IR led ward rounds. Only 6/38 (15.7%) received structured IR teaching at least once a month. Approximately, a third of respondents (13/38) stated training opportunities were significantly compromised secondary to COVID-19. Conclusion: This survey shows overall good satisfaction with IR training. However, improved training opportunities in vascular IR, interventional oncology, paediatric IR and stroke thrombectomy are required. In addition, access to clinics, ward rounds and protected time for research is needed to improve training quality.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherOxford University Pressen_US
dc.subjectRadiologyen_US
dc.titleInterventional radiology training in the UK: a view from within-a national survey.en_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.source.journaltitleBritish Journal of Radiology
dc.source.beginpage20230039
dc.source.endpage
dc.source.countryEngland
rioxxterms.versionNAen_US
dc.contributor.trustauthorHarborne, Katrina Elizabeth
dc.contributor.trustauthorLiu, Wing Yan
dc.contributor.departmentImagingen_US
dc.contributor.departmentClinical Diagnostic Services
dc.contributor.roleMedical and Dentalen_US
oa.grant.openaccessnaen_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record