The GP tests of competence assessment: which part best predicts fitness to practise decisions?

BACKGROUND: The General Medical Council (GMC) conducts Tests of Competence (ToC) for doctors referred for Fitness to Practise (FtP) issues. GPs take a single best answer knowledge test, an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), and a Simulated Surgery (SimSurg) assessment which is a simulated GP consultation. The aim of this study was to examine the similarities between OSCEs and SimSurg to determine whether each assessment contributed something unique to GP ToCs. METHODS: A mixed methods approach was used. Data were collated on 153 GPs who were required to undertake a ToC as a part of being investigated for FtP issues between February 2010 and October 2016. Using correlation analysis, we examined to what degree performance on the knowledge test, OSCE, and SimSurg related to case examiner recommendations and FtP outcomes, including the unique predictive power of these three assessments. The outcome measures were case examiner recommendations (i) not fit to practise; ii) fit to practise on a limited basis; or iii) fit to practise) as well as FtP outcomes (i) erased/removed from the register; ii) having restrictions/conditions; or iii) be in good standing). For the qualitative component, 45 GP assessors were asked to rate whether they assess the same competencies and which assessment provides better feedback about candidates. RESULTS: There was significant overlap between OSCEs and SimSurg, p < 0.001. SimSurg had additional predictive power in the presence of OSCEs and the knowledge test (p = 0.030) in distinguishing doctors from different FtP categories, while OSCEs did not (p = 0.080). Both the OSCEs (p = 0.004) and SimSurg (p < 0.001) had significant negative correlations with case examiner recommendations when accounting for the effects of the other two assessments. Inductive thematic analysis of the responses to the questionnaire showed that assessors perceived OSCEs to be better suited to target specific knowledge and skills. SimSurg was thought to produce a more global picture as the scenarios more accurately portray a patient consultation. CONCLUSION: While all three assessments are strong predictors of both case examiner recommendations and FtP outcomes, our findings suggest that the efficiency of GP ToCs can be improved by removing some of this overlapping content.

Treating Choroidal Metastases and Improving Vision with Osimertinib in EGFR T790M-Mutated Lung Adenocarcinoma: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.

A 41-year-old never-smoking female was diagnosed with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated T2bN3M1b lung adenocarcinoma with axillary lymph nodes. She complained of blurred vision in the left eye (2/60) and was subsequently found to have a left choroidal metastasis. Treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) erlotinib was started, and after 1 year of disease stability, she developed unsteadiness and worsening visual disturbance (1/60). Brain imaging showed 24 new brain metastases, which were treated with Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery. An enlarging axillary lymph node was biopsied, which identified the T790M mutation, and she commenced the novel TKI osimertinib. Three weeks later, her choroidal lesion had regressed from 3.1 mm to 2.2 mm, and after 2 months of osimertinib, her visual acuity had improved to 6/9. At the last follow-up 8 months after initiation of osimertinib, her choroidal metastasis remains stable, and visual acuity has improved to 6/6. Evidence suggests that osimertinib's efficacy in treating cerebral metastases is superior to that of chemotherapy and other EGFR-TKIs (gefitinib and erlotinib); however, the literature is sparse with regards to the use of osimertinib for the treatment of intraocular disease. In this case, the need for intense daily radiation treatment with its associated toxicities was negated, and as such we propose that osimertinib may be a promising treatment for choroidal metastasis secondary to EGFR-mutated lung adenocarcinoma.

Effect of sex on specialty training application outcomes: a longitudinal administrative data study of UK medical graduates.

OBJECTIVES: To examine sex differences in the specialty training recruitment outcomes of UK medical graduates; and whether sex differences were explained by prior academic attainment and previous fitness to practise (FtP) declarations. DESIGN: Retrospective longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: Administrative data on entrants to all UK medical schools from the UK Medical Education Database. PARTICIPANTS: 10 559 doctors (6 155; 58% female) who entered a UK medical school in 2007 or 2008 and were eligible to apply for specialty training by 2015. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Odds of application, offer and acceptance to any specialty training programme, and on to each of the nine largest training programmes, adjusting for sex, other demographics, prior academic attainment, FtP declaration and medical school. RESULTS: Across all specialties, there were no sex differences in applications for specialty training, but women had increased odds of getting an offer (OR=1.40; 95% CI=1.25 to 1.57; p<0.001) and accepting one (OR=1.43; 95% CI=1.19 to 1.71; p<0.001). Seven of the nine largest specialties showed significant sex differences in applications, which remained after adjusting for other factors. In the adjusted models, Paediatrics (OR=1.57; 95% CI=1.01 to 2.46; p=0.046) and general practice (GP) (OR=1.23; 95% CI=1.03 to 1.46; p=0.017) were the only specialties to show sex differences in offers, both favouring women. GP alone showed sex differences in acceptances, with women being more likely to accept (OR=1.34; 95% CI=1.03 to 1.76; p=0.03). Doctors with an FtP declaration were slightly less likely to apply to specialty training overall (OR=0.84; 95% CI=0.71 to 1.00; p=0.048) and less likely to accept an offer to any programme (OR=0.71; 95% CI=0.52 to 0.98; p=0.036), after adjusting for confounders. CONCLUSIONS: Sex segregation between medical specialties is due to differential application, although research is needed to understand why men are less likely to be offered a place on to GP and Paediatrics training, and if offered GP are less likely to accept.