Measuring the quality of junior hospital doctors in general medicine

During the course of a larger study aimed at relating staffing levels of junior doctors in general medicine to the safety of the care provided, it became clear that consultant doctors considered the quality of their junior staff as being at least as important as the quantity. This paper describes several attempts to develop a feasible and valid method of measuring the quality of senior house officers (SHOs) and registrars using routinely available data. Having rejected three methods and had difficulties with three other methods, a modified Delphi survey was used to explore the extent to which consultants agreed on the key attributes of a high quality SHO or registrar. Sixty-seven (60%) of all consultants in the South-West Thames and Trent regions responded to two rounds of questionnaires which revealed communication skills as being consistently the most significant factor. This was confirmed in a second, anonymous survey of 198 (78%) SHO and registrar posts in the North-West Thames region. It also became clear that consultants viewed the quality of their own SHOs and registrars as generally high. This being so it is argued that the requirement to adjust for quality, when comparing SHO and registrar levels between hospitals, is of minor importance. These results also suggest that the explicit teaching of communication skills should have a high priority in undergraduate and postgraduate education.