Observational analysis shows improved documentation quality in surgical teams with a doctor's assistant, indicating better training for foundation doctors.
Aims As part of a larger scale project looking to improve surgical training for foundation doctors. We hope to quantify the impact of the introduction of a doctor’s assistant role as part of the extended surgical team. This project looks to quantify the quality of documentation for all surgical admissions against set national standards. Methods Assessed against the Academy of Medical and Royal Colleges – Guide to Record Keeping Standards, we reviewed documentation for all general surgical admission prior to and following the employment of a doctor’s assistant. Data collections each took place over a 1-week period. Results 40 and 35 patients were admitted respectively over the two cycles. Key areas of success Proportion of consultant reviews documented to be occurring within 14 hours of admission increased from 47% to 97%. Continued high standards in the use of a standardised proforma / MUST score completion and VTE prescriptions (>85%) Social history taking improved from 58% to 75% Key areas of concern Although some improvements in completion of dementia screening tool and oxygen prescriptions occurred, there is still room for improvement. Conclusions The valuable doctor’s assistant role provides a primarily administrative role within the team to enable foundation doctors to partake in tasks deemed to be of more educational value, as per the recent ASiT survey[1]. Increased variety of sessions are now available for foundation doctors. In further projects we hope to demonstrate any impact on individual wellbeing and satisfaction with the post for doctor's and doctor's assistants.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Crewe et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: