英国联合学会关于英国心脏病学培训的立场声明。

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Heart Pub Date : 2025-02-26 DOI:10.1136/heartjnl-2024-325037
Oliver Ian Brown, Holly Morgan, William John Jenner, Andrew Chapman, Abhishek Joshi, Michael Drozd, Ghulam Andre Ng, John Pierre Greenwood, Mark Westwood, Christian Fielder Camm
{"title":"英国联合学会关于英国心脏病学培训的立场声明。","authors":"Oliver Ian Brown, Holly Morgan, William John Jenner, Andrew Chapman, Abhishek Joshi, Michael Drozd, Ghulam Andre Ng, John Pierre Greenwood, Mark Westwood, Christian Fielder Camm","doi":"10.1136/heartjnl-2024-325037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cardiology training in the UK is facing significant challenges due to a range of factors. Recent curriculum changes have further compounded this issue and significantly risk the ability to produce adequately trained consultants capable of managing patients with increasingly complex cardiovascular disease. The introduction of mandatory dual accreditation in general internal medicine (GIM) alongside cardiology, by design, results in significantly reduced training opportunities, including procedural and subspecialty exposure. Despite prolongation in training duration to mitigate these effects, most trainees now report needing post-certificate of completion of training fellowships to gain the standard competencies required for consultant roles, undermining the curriculum's aim of fostering independent practice. Furthermore, the current training model is misaligned with patient needs, lacking provisions for training in key and expanding services, such as complex structural interventions and inherited cardiac conditions. The increasing complexity of expectations placed on trainees also has the potential to significantly hinder academic training, discouraging research and innovation, thereby risking the future of UK clinical academia. Urgent curriculum reform is not only desirable but also essential and should include limiting GIM training time, improving subspecialty accreditation pathways and revising academic training provisions. If current bodies overseeing cardiology training fail to implement these essential changes, additional options, including an independent regulatory framework for cardiology training, should be considered. Without immediate action, UK cardiology training risks facing a generational crisis of inadequately skilled consultants, which could compromise future patient care.</p>","PeriodicalId":12835,"journal":{"name":"Heart","volume":" ","pages":"e2"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Joint British Societies' position statement on cardiology training in the United Kingdom.\",\"authors\":\"Oliver Ian Brown, Holly Morgan, William John Jenner, Andrew Chapman, Abhishek Joshi, Michael Drozd, Ghulam Andre Ng, John Pierre Greenwood, Mark Westwood, Christian Fielder Camm\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/heartjnl-2024-325037\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Cardiology training in the UK is facing significant challenges due to a range of factors. Recent curriculum changes have further compounded this issue and significantly risk the ability to produce adequately trained consultants capable of managing patients with increasingly complex cardiovascular disease. The introduction of mandatory dual accreditation in general internal medicine (GIM) alongside cardiology, by design, results in significantly reduced training opportunities, including procedural and subspecialty exposure. Despite prolongation in training duration to mitigate these effects, most trainees now report needing post-certificate of completion of training fellowships to gain the standard competencies required for consultant roles, undermining the curriculum's aim of fostering independent practice. Furthermore, the current training model is misaligned with patient needs, lacking provisions for training in key and expanding services, such as complex structural interventions and inherited cardiac conditions. The increasing complexity of expectations placed on trainees also has the potential to significantly hinder academic training, discouraging research and innovation, thereby risking the future of UK clinical academia. Urgent curriculum reform is not only desirable but also essential and should include limiting GIM training time, improving subspecialty accreditation pathways and revising academic training provisions. If current bodies overseeing cardiology training fail to implement these essential changes, additional options, including an independent regulatory framework for cardiology training, should be considered. Without immediate action, UK cardiology training risks facing a generational crisis of inadequately skilled consultants, which could compromise future patient care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12835,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Heart\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e2\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Heart\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2024-325037\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2024-325037","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由于一系列因素,英国的心脏病学培训正面临着巨大的挑战。最近的课程改革进一步加剧了这一问题,并严重影响了培养训练有素的顾问医生的能力,而这些顾问医生有能力处理日益复杂的心血管疾病患者。普通内科(GIM)与心脏病学同时引入强制性双重认证的设计,大大减少了培训机会,包括程序和亚专科方面的培训机会。尽管延长了培训时间以减轻这些影响,但现在大多数受训者都表示需要在获得培训研究员证书后才能获得担任顾问所需的标准能力,这破坏了课程中培养独立实践能力的目标。此外,目前的培训模式与患者需求脱节,缺乏对关键和扩展服务的培训,如复杂结构干预和遗传性心脏疾病。对受训者的期望越来越复杂,也有可能严重阻碍学术培训,阻碍研究和创新,从而危及英国临床学术界的未来。急需进行的课程改革不仅是可取的,而且是必要的,其中应包括限制 GIM 培训时间、改进亚专科认证途径和修订学术培训规定。如果目前负责监督心脏病学培训的机构无法实施这些必要的改革,则应考虑其他方案,包括建立独立的心脏病学培训监管框架。如果不立即采取行动,英国心脏病学培训有可能面临一代顾问技能不足的危机,这可能会影响未来的病人护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Joint British Societies' position statement on cardiology training in the United Kingdom.

Cardiology training in the UK is facing significant challenges due to a range of factors. Recent curriculum changes have further compounded this issue and significantly risk the ability to produce adequately trained consultants capable of managing patients with increasingly complex cardiovascular disease. The introduction of mandatory dual accreditation in general internal medicine (GIM) alongside cardiology, by design, results in significantly reduced training opportunities, including procedural and subspecialty exposure. Despite prolongation in training duration to mitigate these effects, most trainees now report needing post-certificate of completion of training fellowships to gain the standard competencies required for consultant roles, undermining the curriculum's aim of fostering independent practice. Furthermore, the current training model is misaligned with patient needs, lacking provisions for training in key and expanding services, such as complex structural interventions and inherited cardiac conditions. The increasing complexity of expectations placed on trainees also has the potential to significantly hinder academic training, discouraging research and innovation, thereby risking the future of UK clinical academia. Urgent curriculum reform is not only desirable but also essential and should include limiting GIM training time, improving subspecialty accreditation pathways and revising academic training provisions. If current bodies overseeing cardiology training fail to implement these essential changes, additional options, including an independent regulatory framework for cardiology training, should be considered. Without immediate action, UK cardiology training risks facing a generational crisis of inadequately skilled consultants, which could compromise future patient care.

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
Heart
Heart 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
320
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Heart is an international peer reviewed journal that keeps cardiologists up to date with important research advances in cardiovascular disease. New scientific developments are highlighted in editorials and put in context with concise review articles. There is one free Editor’s Choice article in each issue, with open access options available to authors for all articles. Education in Heart articles provide a comprehensive, continuously updated, cardiology curriculum.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信