Griffin, A;
Furmedge, DS;
Gill, D;
O'Keeffe, C;
Verma, A;
Smith, LJ;
Noble, L;
... Ingham Clark, C; + view all
(2015)
Quality and impact of appraisal for revalidation: the perceptions of London's responsible officers and their appraisers.
BMC Medical Education
, 15
, Article 152. 10.1186/s12909-015-0438-7.
Preview |
Text
Quality and impact of appraisal for revalidation: the perceptions of London's responsible officers and their appraisers.pdf Download (843kB) | Preview |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate NHS England London region's approach to the revalidation appraisal of responsible officers in London, exploring perceptions of the quality and impact of the appraisal process. Revalidation is the process which aims to ensure doctors in the UK are up-to-date and fit to practice medicine thus improving the quality of patient care. Revalidation recommendations are largely premised on the documentation included in annual appraisals, which includes the professional development a doctor has undertaken and supporting information about their practice. METHODS: A pan-London qualitative study exploring the views of responsible officers and their appraisers about the revalidation appraisal process. The study aimed to gain an in-depth understanding of the experiences and perceptions of the participants. Responsible officers were purposefully sampled to represent the broadest range of designated bodies. Data analysis generated themes pertaining to quality and impact of appraisal for revalidation with the potential to feed into and shape the evolving system under investigation. RESULTS: The central importance of highly skilled appraisers was highlighted. Both groups reported educational opportunities embedded within the appraisal process. Independent appraisers, not matched by clinical speciality or place of work, were considered to take a more objective view of a responsible officer's practice by providing an 'outsider perspective'. However, covering the breadth of roles, in sufficient depth, was challenging. Participants reported a bias favouring the appraisal of the responsible officer role above others including clinical work. Appraisal and revalidation was perceived to have the potential to improve the healthcare standards and support both personal development and institutional quality improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Responsible officers play a central role in the revalidation process. Getting responsible officer appraisal right is central to supporting those individuals to in turn support doctors and healthcare organisations in continuous quality improvement. The complexity and importance of the role of responsible officer may make achieving an appraisal of all roles of such individuals problematic. This evaluation suggests responsible officer appraisal was perceived as educational and effective.
| Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Title: | Quality and impact of appraisal for revalidation: the perceptions of London's responsible officers and their appraisers |
| Location: | England |
| Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
| DOI: | 10.1186/s12909-015-0438-7 |
| Publisher version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-015-0438-7 |
| Additional information: | © 2015 Griffin et al. Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
| UCL classification: | UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > UCL Medical School |
| URI: | https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1473297 |
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
