Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-21T16:43:12.891Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Otological aspects of undergraduate otolaryngology education in the United Kingdom

Presenting Author: Richard Steven

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2016

Richard Steven ,
Gary Mires ,
Simon Lloyd ,
Stephen Jones ,
Patrick Spielmann  and
Sean McAleer
Richard Steven
Affiliation:
University of Dundee
Gary Mires
Affiliation:
University of Dundee
Simon Lloyd
Affiliation:
Department of ENT, Manchester Royal Infimary
Stephen Jones
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee
Patrick Spielmann
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee
Sean McAleer
Affiliation:
Centre for Medical Education, University of Dundee
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Abstracts
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 130 , Supplement S3: Abstracts for the 10th International Conference on Cholesteatoma , May 2016 , pp. S235
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2016 

Learning Objectives:

Introduction: Studies show that not all UK medical schools have a formal otolaryngology attachment, that the time dedicated to teaching in those which do is comparatively small and that qualified doctors feel that their training was inadequate.

Avoiding curriculum overload is a challenge in the ever expanding field of medicine. It would therefore be advantageous to identify and include key aspects of a subject within a curriculum. Here we report the otological findings from a national curriculum development project.

Methods: A longitudinal transformation approach to mixed methods research was utilised. The undergraduate curricula from UK medical schools were evaluated. Results from this comparison were used to devise a questionnaire. This was distributed nationally via email to establish what doctors felt a newly qualified doctor should know about otolaryngology.

Results: A curriculum comparison of 19 medical schools revealed a high degree of variability between undergraduate otolaryngology curricula.

308 survey responses were received. Doctors felt that graduates should be able to perform otoscopy (93%) and tuning fork tests (78%). Respondents indicated that graduates should understand indications for common audiological investigations but not to interpret the results.

Respondents felt graduates should be able to assess a patient with chronic otitis media. Results indicate graduates should know more about conditions which present acutely.

Doctors felt that graduates should understand indications for otological procedures but few felt that they should have observed these. Respondents also felt that it was important for graduates to learn about the implications of hearing loss and communication with hearing impaired individuals.

Conclusions: This method of curriculum development allows the end users, the doctor, to influence the content of the curriculum. The study shows the variability in otolaryngology teaching in the UK and highlights key areas for student learning.