As part of a wider quality improvement project (QIP) aiming to improve trainees’ experiences with ‘Raising Concerns’ in a large mental health trust, we sought to improve the trainee representative (rep) structure. This would give trainees more transparent processes and provide intermediaries by which to raise concerns. Based on change ideas generated from our driver diagram, roles were created to coordinate meetings and represent specific groups of trainees and on-call rotas.

Prior to August 2022, there were an undefined number of ‘Senior House Officer’ (SHO) reps who were recruited informally by the Post-Graduate Medical Education Team. The duties of these reps were not clearly detailed. As part of our first ‘Plan, Do, Study, Act’ (PDSA) cycle, we identified groups of trainees that needed additional representation (International Medical Graduates [IMGs], Less than Full Time trainees [LTFT]) and introduced a Wellbeing Rep to cover all training grades. Specifically for SHOs, we introduced three core roles (Rota/Placement, Inclusion, and Social) and individual roles for the six on-call rotas. Following the implementation of this rep structure, we gathered quantitative data, including whether trainees had utilised the reps and how effective they were in raising concerns, and qualitative feedback. We gathered data from both the reps and the whole cohort of trainees. We then started another PDSA cycle in August 2023.

On a 1–5 scale (5 = very effective), the average response from trainees for how effective the trust reps were in supporting raising concerns was 3.8 (5 responders), with no trainees who responded feeling that any of the rep roles needed restructuring. However, the rep survey highlighted that the following roles needed restructuring: Rota/Placement rep, Social rep, and Rota reps. The Rota/Placement role was highlighted as being unnecessary due to the existence of individual rota reps, but there was a need for a ‘lead’ rep to coordinate rep meetings and induction. Unfortunately, a Social rep was not recruited, however it was identified that due to the importance of the role more than one trainee may be required to arrange social events.

Overall, the trainee response to the new rep structure has been neutral/effective, but we hope to obtain more responses in the next PDSA cycle. The rep feedback highlighted the need for coordinator roles to improve cohesion. The results have informed change ideas which we implemented in August 2023. The second PDSA cycle will be completed in July 2024.

Raising a concern is an integral duty for a doctor. The General Medical Council guidelines on Good Medical Practice state that a culture should be promoted that allows “all staff to raise concerns openly and safely”. Appointment of Postgraduate Doctors in Training to Representative (Rep) positions can be an effective way to allow trainee voices to be heard. Here we present the results of a Development Half-Day created to empower Reps with the knowledge and confidence to represent peers effectively within a large mental health Trust. The training session was identified as a ”change idea” in a wider Quality Improvement Project (QIP) seeking to improve trainee confidence in raising concerns.

16 Postgraduate Doctors in Training Reps were invited to attend a Development Half-Day in November 2022. The day included talks on their roles and responsibilities, respectful challenge and maintaining well-being.

Quantitative and qualitative data were gathered using anonymous questionnaires completed before and after the session. The questionnaire contained 4 questions asking them to rate their knowledge of their role as a rep and confidence in raising trainee concerns. This was quantified using a 1-10 scale for each question with 1 being lowest confidence/knowledge and 10 being highest. Mean scores and standard deviations were calculated. A paired one-tailed t-test was used to assess the statistical significance of the difference in pre- and post-session scores.

9 Reps attended the Development Half-Day and completed the pre- and post-session questionnaires.

There was a statistically significant improvement between pre- and post-session scores for all questions (all p values <0.05). Importantly there was a significant increase in the confidence felt by reps in knowing where and who to raise trainee concerns to (p < 0.05).

Qualitative feedback indicated that attendees found the session useful and they appreciated that it was in-person. The only suggestion for improvement was for the session to have been held earlier, closer to when reps were initially appointed; this will be a change that will be implemented in the next “Plan, Do, Study, Act” cycle of the QIP.

Implementation of a Development Half-Day for Trainee Reps was shown to have a significantly positive impact on their confidence in their roles and their ability to respectively challenge seniors. The Reps additionally reported being better equipped at knowing where and who to raise concerns to. This will hopefully aid in their ability to signpost and empower other trainees to do the same.

As part of a wider Quality Improvement Project aiming to improve trainees’ experiences with ‘Raising Concerns’ in a large mental health trust, we sought to improve induction processes to make information on raising concerns more accessible when starting a new post. Based on change ideas generated from our driver diagram, peer-delivered information was identified as a useful tool, so a trainee-led session was introduced to the induction programme.

A 60-minute trainee-led session was integrated into the induction programme for Postgraduate Doctors in Training in August 2022. The session included sections on raising concerns, on-call advice and rota information. Following the induction, as part of our “Plan, Do, Study, Act” (PDSA) cycle, we sent a questionnaire to gather data from trainees, which covered quantitative measures, including overall helpfulness of the session and effectiveness of information on ‘raising concerns’, and qualitative feedback for how to improve the session. The session was replicated at both the December 2022 and February 2023 inductions, incorporating the feedback from each previous session.

On a 1-5 scale (5 = strongly agree), the average response for how helpful the trainee-led induction session was 4.5 from both the August and December 2022 inductions. 4 out of 6 responders from the August 2022 induction specifically mentioned the information on raising concerns as being particularly helpful. There was also feedback on improvements that could be introduced, such as increasing the amount of time for the session to allow for more questions. When asked to rate the helpfulness of the ‘raising concerns’ section, the average response was 4.83 and 4.50 for August and December 2022 inductions, respectively. Following the feedback from August 2022, we implemented changes to increase the duration to 90 minutes and include trainee reps in a separate ‘Question and Answer’ session. Unfortunately, there were only 2 responders to the December 2022 questionnaire due to a small intake, so we will evaluate data from February 2023 induction to analyse the effectiveness of changes made to the session and assess the need for further improvements.

Overall, the response to our trainee-led induction session has been positive, with good feedback both for the whole session and specifically relating to ‘raising concerns’. It has highlighted trainees’ appreciation for peer-delivered information and the need for more time in this session. The questionnaire from February 2023 induction will give more data on whether our improvements have been effective and provide ideas for future PDSA cycles.

Raising concerns is a duty for all doctors. However, a scoping exercise within a large mental health Trust demonstrated that trainees experience difficulties in raising both patient safety and training concerns. As part of a trainee-led quality improvement (QI) project within this Trust, our aim was to develop a pulse survey to capture the current likelihood of trainees raising concerns and factors influencing this.

An online survey was developed using ‘plan do study act’ (PDSA) methodology. The initial draft was informed by data from the Autumn 2021 scoping exercise. The survey was refined using a collaborative trainee-led approach. It was tested by trainees involved in the QI project followed by two other trainees and was revised accordingly.

Trainees across all training grades were invited to complete the survey through various communication channels. The pulse survey will be repeated monthly with a two-week response window.

Ten trainees out of 103 responded to the first pulse survey open from 18th to 31st January 2023 (response rate 9.7%). Seven respondents were core trainees and three were higher trainees.

Respondents were more likely to raise patient safety concerns than training concerns (average score of 3.8 out of 5, where 5 equals ‘very likely’, versus 3.4 out of 5 respectively). Of the three respondents who had experienced a patient safety concern in the past 2 weeks, only two had used any existing process to raise it. These data were replicated for training concerns.

No respondents were confident that effective action would be taken if they raised a training concern, while less than half of respondents were confident that effective action would be taken if it were a patient safety concern.

The reasons for the low response rate are likely varied. However, there may be some similar underlying reasons for low engagement in surveys and low engagement in raising concerns. Given this, a more negative picture of trainees’ likelihood of raising concerns may have been portrayed if more trainees engaged in the survey.

Engaging trainees to provide insight into their likelihood of raising concerns is challenging. Despite the low response rate, this initial pulse survey demonstrated that trainees continue to experience barriers to raising concerns. PDSA methodology will continue to be used to optimise the monthly pulse survey response rate. The key QI outcome measures will also be integrated into pre and post intervention surveys as a pragmatic approach to evaluate specific change ideas.

Raising concerns is an important part of being a doctor and part of the GMC ‘Good Medical Practice’ guidelines, however as a trainee it often comes with specific challenges. Historically trainees are often left feeling that their concerns are not taken seriously and there is no resolution to problems raised. Here we present the findings of a scoping exercise undertaken as part of a Quality Improvement project exploring these issues within a large mental health Trust.

Trainees across all training grades from Foundation doctors to higher trainees were invited to engage in virtual focus groups specific to their training programme. Contributions were analysed anonymously using a thematic analysis approach by two independent coders. Quantitative data were also gathered using an online survey to capture trainees who had been unable to attend a focus group.

Key results included:

• • A total of 6 focus groups were attended by more than 35 trainees, with high turnout particularly within Foundation trainees and CT1 doctors.

• • Three key themes were identified from the qualitative data: difficulties with the process of raising concerns, fear of the consequences and challenging the culture of the organisation.

• • It was noted that senior trainees felt more comfortable with the process of raising concerns compared with junior colleagues but were more apathetic about the impact of doing so.

• • 12 trainees completed the online survey. Of these, 6 (50%) reported having had patient safety concerns and 7 (58%) had had concerns about their training.

• • The most common reported barriers to raising concerns were the impact on working relationships (67%), lack of support (50%) and fear of repercussions on their training (50%). 42% of respondents were unsure of how to raise concerns.

• • Trainee suggestions for change included improved information for trainees and trainers about the process for raising concerns, sharing of feedback about concerns raised more widely and regular opportunity to meet with key stakeholders.

The majority of trainees had experienced concerns about either patient safety or training issues. It will be necessary to address the multiple barriers highlighted to enable trainees to feel more confident and able to raise concerns. Increasing awareness of escalation processes, improving the processes themselves and fostering a supportive environment which encourages and supports trainees to raise concerns will be important given the implications for patient safety and trainee well-being.