Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-09T04:48:57.425Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Implementing and Evaluating Online Revision Sessions for the MRCPsych Paper a Examination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2023

Thomas Hewson*
Affiliation:
Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Swanand Patwardhan
Affiliation:
Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
Emily Mountain
Affiliation:
Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
Latha Hackett
Affiliation:
Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
*
*Corresponding author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

Preparing for postgraduate examinations is stressful for many doctors, with psychological, financial, and social impacts. Ensuring that doctors feel supported with exam preparation is likely to improve their well-being and performance, whilst also potentially addressing workforce retention and differential attainment. This quality improvement project aimed to improve the confidence and preparedness of trainees taking the MRCPsych Paper A exam in the North West School of Psychiatry.

Methods

Six weekly online revision sessions were held for trainees preparing for the MRCPsych Paper A examination. One session was devoted to each major curriculum topic, whilst two covered neurosciences. The sessions were held over Microsoft Teams for 1 hour and chaired by senior trainees and Consultant Psychiatrists. The sessions incorporated a combination of PowerPoint slides, discussion about relevant theory, and interactive practice questions using Slido. A baseline survey was completed to ascertain trainees current levels of exam preparation and confidence. Questionnaires were administered at the end of each revision session to measure their impact and gather feedback. Trainees indicated the extent to which they felt confident with each curriculum topic and their responses were compared, at group level, before and after the revision sessions (1 = strongly disagree with feeling confident, 5 = strongly agree with feeling confident).

Results

40 trainees completed pre-session feedback and 56 trainees completed post-session feedback. The mean confidence scores of trainees improved by between 25.4% to 51.5% after the revision sessions, with the lowest pre-session mean confidence score being observed for neuroscience and the greatest improvement being observed for psychopharmacology. 77.8% of trainees rated the revision sessions as ‘extremely useful’ and 22.2% perceived them as ‘useful’. All trainees agreed (43.4%) or strongly agreed (56.6%) that their knowledge improved after attending the sessions, and all trainees agreed (23.6%) or strongly agreed (76.4%) that they would recommend them to colleagues. Trainees favourite aspects of the revision sessions included completing multiple choice questions, combining Slido polling with PowerPoint slides, and the speakers explanations of difficult concepts. Suggestions for improvement included offering more frequent and longer revision sessions, concealing group voting choices on Slido until revealing the correct answers, and teaching more relevant theory alongside practice questions.

Conclusion

Online group revision sessions combining interactive polling and didactic teaching are popular and useful amongst trainees preparing for MRCPsych Paper A. These sessions appear to improve trainees' self-reported confidence with exam curricula content, although further evaluation is required to determine whether they improve examination pass rates.

Type
Education and Training
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NC
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This does not need to be placed under each abstract, just each page is fine.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.