Post-Certification JCST TIG Fellowships-2024
Training Interface Group Fellowships Advanced Training Posts up to 49
Oncoplastic Breast Surgery
Details of the Fellowships
From 2023 the fellowships will be open solely to applicants that will be post-certification or appear on the GMC and/or Irish Specialist Registers at the start date of the post. These posts are suited to those applicants within two years of the completion of surgical specialty training.
We are recruiting 10 fellows for posts starting on the 7th of August 2024 for a period of 12 months in training centres throughout the UK. The 12 month posts offer a year of intensive training and are suitable for candidates who have trained in Plastic Surgery or General Surgery, who have a demonstrable interest in Oncoplastic Breast Surgery.
Training Locations Available
The training centres that are approved to deliver the advanced training are:
- University Hospital Birmingham NHS Trust
- Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust
- Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust
- Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
- Barts Health NS Trust
- Imperial College healthcare NHS Trust
- Hull and East Yorkshire University Hospitals NHS Trust
- Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust & Royal Brompton Hospital
- Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust
- St Helens and Knowsley Hospitals & Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen Hospitals NHS Trust
- Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
- Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
- Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust
- Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust & Northern General Hospital
- Doncaster and Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
- Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
- Queen Victoria Hospital NHS Foundation Trust - applicants to this unit would need to have evidence to demonstrate microsurgical competence
Other training centres may offer additional training under an honorary contract, such as St Thomas's, Queen Victoria Hospital, East Grinstead and Swansea.
The application process for new centres is currently open so there is a possibility that new centres may be added to the list. Although approved for training not all centres listed above will be available or will be accepting a fellow for 2024. A confirmed list of locations will be published to candidates shortly before the interview date. Further details of the fellowships, the units and the training available can be viewed on the JCST website.
Recruitment
Applications open on the 16th October 2023 and should be submitted via the on-line portal (Oriel) until the 1st December 2023. To access Oriel click the 'Apply Now' button at the top of this page.
The interviews will be virtual and will be held from 30th January 2024.
For full details of the the selection process please view the
The Selection Process
The selection process will be made of two components
Curriculum Vitae and Logbook
As part of the selection process we are asking candidates to provide a validated logbook demonstrating experience relevant to the sub-specialty and a structured CV. The CV should be no longer than 4 pages in length, text a minimum of 12 point font, and include the information listed below.
Candidates will be asked to email both documents to england.sevrecruitment.sw@hee.nhs.uk by no later than 10:00am on the 8th of January 2024.
List of contents |
|
|
Additional Qualifications |
Please list additional qualifications other than FRCS or equivalent, including year of attainment and institution. Give a short summary of the work involved and outcome. Please state if a qualification is in progress or completed. |
|
Prizes |
Please list up to 5 prizes you have, when they were awarded and for what reason. Research grant awards can be included. |
|
Courses |
Please list a short summary of relevant specialty specific training course or conferences you have attended in the last 3 years. |
|
Audit |
Please list a summary (maximum of 6) of audit experience, highlighting relevance of the audits, your participation in the audit, where the audit was presented including examples of closing the loop audits. |
|
Publications |
Please list a short summary and reference of your publications, highlighting relevant specialty papers and your involvement in the publication. Book chapters can be included. |
|
Presentations |
Please list a short summary of your poster/ oral platform presentations, highlighting relevant presentations only. |
|
Teaching |
Please summarise your teaching experience, listing your involvement i.e. organisation of teaching programs, delivery of teaching, faculty teaching experience, participation in an educational committee, qualification in teaching (not included in additional qualification section). Briefly summarise any feedback for each role |
|
Management / Leadership/ Teamworking |
Please list any managerial roles/leadership training including designing and leading any healthcare improvement project (within the last 3 years). Include any formal qualification in management or active participation in NHS committee work |
|
Evidence of cross specialty working |
Please provide examples of cross speciality working |
Virtual Interview
The interview will consist of two individual interview panels and both interviews will be 15 minutes in length. The interview panel will be made of a combination of specialty representatives.
Panel 1 (15 minutes - 7.5 mins per competence)
- Research
- Leadership/Management
Panel 2 (15 minutes - 7.5 mins per competence)
- Clinical Scenario
- Audit/service improvement
An outline of the competences and scoring structure for each of the components/competences are outlined below
Panel One
Research Descriptors (with abstract)
|
Criterion |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
Understanding of abstract |
No understanding of the principles of the abstract. |
Poor Understanding about the structure of the abstract. Confused about what should be included in the subsets. |
Reasonable understanding of the structure of the abstract. Needed prompting |
Good understanding of the structure of the abstract. Minimal prompting |
Full understanding of the appropriate abstract with a stated research question, study design, methodology and conclusion. |
|
Introduction |
No understanding of the purpose of the introduction. |
Poor Understanding about the requirements of the introduction to a study |
Reasonable understanding of purpose of the introduction- needs prompting |
Good understanding of purpose of the introduction, highlights 50% of the listed points. Minimal prompting |
Full understanding of the purpose of the introduction, comments on most of the listed points. |
|
Research Design and Methodology |
No understanding of study design, ethics requirements or how to design a study |
Poor or confused understanding of study and trial design, ethics requirements and how to design a study |
Reasonable understanding of study and trial design, ethics requirements and how to design a study but needs prompting |
Good understanding with minimal prompting |
Full understanding of study and trial design and ethics requirements |
|
Understanding of data analysis |
No understanding of statistical methods |
Poor or confused understanding of statistical methods |
Reasonable understanding of statistical methods but needs prompting |
Good understanding of statistical methods with minimal prompting |
Full understanding of statistical methods- is able to identify both statistical strengths and weakness of the stated methods. |
|
Interpretation of results |
No understanding of results and how it relates to the study question. Not aware of any limitations of the study. |
Poor or Confused understanding of relevance of results. Limited awareness of limitations of the study. |
Reasonable description of relevance of results. Understands limitations of study with prompting |
Good description of relevance of results. Good understanding of limitations of study but needed some prompting. |
Full description of relevance of results. Comments on most of the points described in a logical manner |
|
Discussion/Conclusion |
No understanding of the purpose of the discussion and recommendations on clinical practice |
Poor understanding of the purpose of the discussion and recommendations on clinical practice |
Reasonable understanding of the purpose of the discussion and recommendations on clinical practice |
Good understanding of the purpose of the discussion and recommendations on clinical practice |
Full understanding of the purpose of the discussion and recommendations on clinical practice and impact. |
Leadership & Management
|
Domain |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
Situational awareness |
No awareness of the pertinent issues that need to be addressed in this situation |
Some awareness of the pertinent issues that need to be addressed in this situation but confused about others |
Reasonable awareness of the pertinent issues that need to be addressed in this situation but needs prompting |
Good awareness of the pertinent issues that need to be addressed in this situation minimal prompting |
Clearly identifies all relevant issues of the situation without prompting |
|
Judgement in action |
No attempt how to judge the actions needed |
Poor attempt on the actions needed |
Can reasonably identify the need for some actions needed but needs prompting |
Good Understanding of most of the actions needed with little prompting |
Able to understand and communicate the required actions needed with no prompting. |
|
Setting priorities |
No attempt at prioritisation |
Some attempt to prioritise but in a confused and illogical order |
Reasonable plan but needs some prompting to address all the issues |
Good grasp of the situation and reasonable attempt to prioritise with little prompting |
Clear and effective prioritisation with no prompting |
|
Orchestration of team |
No awareness of the breadth of team involvement and organisation involved to tackle the issue |
Some awareness of the team involvement and organisation but not in a logical manner. |
Reasonable awareness of the broader working of the team and organization with some prompting |
Good awareness of the broader working of the team and organization with little prompting |
Is aware of the breadth of team working and able to organise the team to work effectively together with no prompting |
|
Willingness to accept responsibility |
Fails to engage or understand the level of responsibility required in the situation |
Identifies some aspects of taking on responsibility for the task |
Reasonable identification of some roles of leadership and responsibility for the task with prompting |
good identification of the role of leadership in introducing new technique or device, with little prompting |
Clearly identifies leadership role and how this can be used to good effect to introduce new technique or device with no prompting |
Panel Two
Clinical Scenario - Scoring Grid
|
Criterion |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
Recognition of clinical issues |
No recognition of pertinent clinical issues |
Recognises some of the issues but not important ones |
Recognises most of clinical issues but Needs some prompting |
Recogizes all clinical – both reconstructive and oncological issues and relates it to the case with little prompting |
Recognises all issues both reconstructive and oncological pertaining to the case with no prompting. |
|
Clinical Judgement |
No understanding of which issues can be addressed |
Poor understanding of the issues that can be addressed. Some attempt to prioritise but in a confused and illogical order |
Reasonable understanding of the issues that can be addressed, has some idea of prioritization but needs some prompting |
Good understanding and can present a clear patient pathway for the case. Good prioritization. Little prompting needed |
Full understanding of the patient pathway with clear and effective discussion of issues and logical and complete management strategy. No prompting. |
|
Planning and use of resources |
No attempt at planning or at using resources |
Poor attempt at planning, uses resources ineffectively |
Reasonable attempt at planning and mentions use of some resources with prompting |
Good attempt at planning and reasonable use of resources with little prompting |
Effective plan using all resources appropriately with no prompting |
|
Communication strategy |
No communication, attempts to work alone |
Poor and ineffective communication |
Partial communication but misses out some key personnel or issues with prompting |
Good communication with most of the relevant individuals involved with little prompting. |
Communicates thoroughly with all relevant individuals with no prompting |
Audit/Service Improvement - Scoring Grid
|
Criterion |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
Clinical issues and standards |
Fails to recognise the clinical issue that has triggered the audit and the impact on patient care |
Poor understanding of the clinical issues, unable to describe key initial steps in the audit process |
Reasonable understanding of clinical issues and can describe key initial steps in the audit process with some prompting |
Good understanding of clinical issues and can describe key initial steps in the audit process with little prompting |
Full understanding of relevant clinical issues and describes steps with no prompting. |
|
Planning, methods and resources |
No understanding of how to plan or find resources. Or how to collect data |
Poor understanding of how to collect data Some attempt to plan but in a confused and illogical order. |
Reasonable plan with data collection and use of resources with some prompting. |
Good understanding of how to collect data, use resources in a clear logical manner with little prompting |
Full understanding of how to plan an audit and undertake data collection. Appropriate use of resources. No prompting |
|
Biases and design difficulties |
Does not understand the principle of bias in general or in the scenario. Cannot suggest a design or describe any difficulties. |
Poor understanding of the bias and limitations of audit design |
Reasonable understanding of the bias and limitations the audit design but has no plan to address these |
Good understanding of the bias and difficulties with audit design and makes some suggestions for improvement with little prompting |
Full understanding of biases and difficulties in the plan and has clear ideas to improve original plan without prompting |
|
Communication and dissemination of results |
Fails to suggest how the results of an audit is presented and results acted upon |
Poor understanding of how the results of an audit is presented and results acted upon. Has some ideas but does not identify the key people who need to be informed of the outcome |
Reasonable understanding how the results of an audit is presented and results acted upon Recognises some of the key people to be informed but does not inform sensitively. Some idea of the audit cycle with some prompting |
Good understanding how the results of an audit is presented and results acted upon. Identifies most of the key people to be informed and has some idea that sensitivities may be involved. Understands audit cycle with little prompting |
Full understanding of result dissemination and stakeholder involvement. Identifies all the key people to be informed and suggests how to do so recognising any sensitivities. Clear idea of the audit cycle. No prompting. |