How prepared are UK medical graduates for practice? A rapid review of the literature 2009-2014

Abstract

Objective: To understand how prepared UK medical graduates are for practice and the effectiveness of workplace transition interventions.

Design: A rapid review of the literature (registration #CRD42013005305).

Data sources: Nine major databases (and key websites) were searched in two timeframes (July-September 2013; updated May-June 2014): CINAHL, Embase, Educational Resources Information Centre, Health Management Information Consortium, MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Knowledge.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Primary research or studies reporting UK medical graduates' preparedness between 2009 and 2014: manuscripts in English; all study types; participants who are final-year medical students, medical graduates, clinical educators, patients or NHS employers and all outcome measures.

Data extraction: At time 1, three researchers screened manuscripts (for duplicates, exclusion/inclusion criteria and quality). Remaining 81 manuscripts were coded. At time 2, one researcher repeated the process for 2013-2014 (adding six manuscripts). Data were analysed using a narrative synthesis and mapped against Tomorrow's Doctors (2009) graduate outcomes.

Results: Most studies comprised junior doctors' self-reports (65/87, 75%), few defined preparedness and a programmatic approach was lacking. Six themes were highlighted: individual skills/knowledge, interactional competence, systemic/technological competence, personal preparedness, demographic factors and transitional interventions. Graduates appear prepared for history taking, physical examinations and some clinical skills, but unprepared for other aspects, including prescribing, clinical reasoning/diagnoses, emergency management, multidisciplinary team-working, handover, error/safety incidents, understanding ethical/legal issues and ward environment familiarity. Shadowing and induction smooth transition into practice, but there is a paucity of evidence around assistantship efficacy.

Conclusions: Educational interventions are needed to address areas of unpreparedness (eg, multidisciplinary team-working, prescribing and clinical reasoning). Future research in areas we are unsure about should adopt a programmatic and rigorous approach, with clear definitions of preparedness, multiple stakeholder perspectives along with multisite and longitudinal research designs to achieve a joined-up, systematic, approach to understanding future educational requirements for junior doctors.

Keywords: BASIC SCIENCES; EDUCATION & TRAINING (see Medical Education & Training); GENERAL MEDICINE (see Internal Medicine); INTENSIVE & CRITICAL CARE.

Figure 1

Study selection process 2009–2013.

Figure 2

Study selection process 2013–2014.