How do we improve training in pulmonary physiology and the interpretation of lung function tests? | Thorax

Subscribe
Log In More

Log in via Institution
Log in via OpenAthens

Log in using your username and password
For personal accounts OR managers of institutional accounts

Username *

Password *

Forgot your log in details?Register a new account?
Forgot your user name or password?
Basket
Search More

Search for this keyword

Advanced search

Responses

Editorial

How do we improve training in pulmonary physiology and the interpretation of lung function tests?

Free

Compose a Response to This Article

Compose Response

Title *

Author Information

Contributors
First Name and Middle Initial * First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'. Last Name * Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'. Email Address * Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com Occupation * Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'. Affiliation * Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.

Statement of Competing Interests

Competing interests? *

Yes

No

Please describe the competing interests

PLEASE NOTE:

A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.

I agree to and have read the terms and conditions for rapid responses and BMJ Privacy Notice *

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

Modernising scientific careers in the NHS: capacity building to improve training in pulmonary physiology and the interpretation of lung function tests.
Chris Ward, Ian A Forrest and Graham Burns
Published on: 19 January 2018

Published on: 19 January 2018
Modernising scientific careers in the NHS: capacity building to improve training in pulmonary physiology and the interpretation of lung function tests.
- Chris Ward, Senior Lecturer Newcastle University
- Other Contributors:
  Ian A Forrest, Consultant Physician
  
  Graham Burns, Consultant Physician
We read with interest the timely editorial by Gerrard Phillips (1), concerning the importance of providing physiological training to trainee respiratory physicians. This reviewed a French study indicating that trainees who had received an internship in a respiratory lab were substantially better at diagnosing respiratory abnormalities compared with trainees without such training. (2) Dr Phillips made a persuasive, “essential” case for an integrated understanding of respiratory physiology/pathophysiology, lung function testing and interpretation in clinical trainees.

We strongly agree and also argue that the problem is the recognition of the importance of physiology in general, across the specialist service. We are involved in work that aims to build physiologist numbers, leadership and lab capacity, and feel this could lead to improved training for trainee doctors, as has been shown in the audit of French trainees (2). This would very much benefit from further support from colleagues and hope that the following information helps to make this case.

In December 2015 the first NHS physiology scientist students of the new national NHS Masters in Respiratory medicine graduated from Newcastle University. This course is part of the national Modernising Scientific Careers (MSC) program in the NHS. The respiratory teaching faculty is consultant led, with delivery in hospital clinical teaching facilities.

Modernising scientific careers (MSC) is a UK wide initia...
Show More

We read with interest the timely editorial by Gerrard Phillips (1), concerning the importance of providing physiological training to trainee respiratory physicians. This reviewed a French study indicating that trainees who had received an internship in a respiratory lab were substantially better at diagnosing respiratory abnormalities compared with trainees without such training. (2) Dr Phillips made a persuasive, “essential” case for an integrated understanding of respiratory physiology/pathophysiology, lung function testing and interpretation in clinical trainees.

We strongly agree and also argue that the problem is the recognition of the importance of physiology in general, across the specialist service. We are involved in work that aims to build physiologist numbers, leadership and lab capacity, and feel this could lead to improved training for trainee doctors, as has been shown in the audit of French trainees (2). This would very much benefit from further support from colleagues and hope that the following information helps to make this case.

In December 2015 the first NHS physiology scientist students of the new national NHS Masters in Respiratory medicine graduated from Newcastle University. This course is part of the national Modernising Scientific Careers (MSC) program in the NHS. The respiratory teaching faculty is consultant led, with delivery in hospital clinical teaching facilities.

Modernising scientific careers (MSC) is a UK wide initiative, led by the Chief Scientific Officer of the Department of Health to address training and education in healthcare science. This drew on stakeholder consultation in 2008 with policy proposals published in 2010. A central component of this initiative is a three year, part time Master of Science degree aimed at equipping future scientist leaders. The students involved include NHS employed Medical Physicists, Cardiologists, Vascular, Gastrointestinal and Respiratory Physiologists. These capacities are all relevant to Respiratory medicine and an integrated future training of Specialist trainee Physicians with scientists.

It is noteworthy, and a concern, that Cardiology trainee scientists have consistently outnumbered Respiratory trainees in the NHS scientist masters course (c.3:1). There are a number of potential explanations for this but we feel it is possible that some respiratory centres do not know of the program and the potential for fully funded trainee places. Funding is available covering both the MSc course and the salary of the scientists. This is made available following the provision of a business case made by individual departments and funds currently derive from demarcated regional education budgets and not the host Department or hospital. We feel this represents an important opportunity for capacity building for respiratory medicine, and the discussion raised in Dr Phillips editorial, indicating that internship in a respiratory lab led to better respiratory training for clinicians.

Precision, personalised medicine is exemplified by recent breakthroughs in Respiratory Medicine. These include the use of small molecule modulators of the Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Regulator (CFTR) channel in patients with Cystic Fibrosis lung disease. Future research of such approaches and measuring the efficacy of potentially transformational treatments in Respiratory Medicine is dependent on the capacity for U.K respiratory physiology and training for both clinicians and scientists. We feel that the current 4–5 year window to address respiratory physiology training for specialist training of Physicians highlighted by Dr Phillips is an opportunity for further coordination involving both Physicians and physiological scientists. The faculty developed for the training of NHS respiratory scientists in Newcastle would be very keen to pursue this with all respiratory colleagues.

.
Yours sincerely

Chris Ward, Ian Forrest, Graham Burns

References:
1. How do we improve training in pulmonary physiology and the interpretation of lung function tests? Phillips G. Thorax. 2018 Jan;73(1):2-3. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2017-210140. Epub 2017 Oct 17.

2. Does training respiratory physicians in clinical respiratory physiology and interpretation of pulmonary function tests improve core knowledge? M Patout, L Sesé, T Gille, B Coiffard, S Korzeniewski, E Lhuillier, A Pradel, C Tardif, A Chambellan, C Straus, S Matecki, T Perez, L Thiberville, A Didier. Thorax. 2018 Jan;73(1):78-81. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2016-209136. Epub 2017 Mar 3.
Show Less

Conflict of Interest:
None declared.
- Back to top