Hostname: page-component-5b777bbd6c-kmmxp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-22T11:41:38.013Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Psychiatry E-Learning for Foundation Doctors: Creation and Review of Four Modules

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 June 2025

Lauren Fitzmaurice
Affiliation:
Sheffield Health and Social Care NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, United Kingdom
Felicity Allman
Affiliation:
Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust, Northumberland, United Kingdom
Prathiba Rao
Affiliation:
Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust, Northumberland, United Kingdom
Arthita Das
Affiliation:
Rotherham, Doncaster and South Humber NHS Foundation Trust, Rotherham, United Kingdom
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: Foundation doctors rotate through six specialties during their programme. These may/may not include a psychiatry placement. E-learning for health (E-lfh) is a free resource which maps to the professional capabilities in the foundation curriculum, including mental health capabilities. During a six month fellowship, 4 topics were either newly created or improved within the psychiatry e-learning: anxiety disorders, substance use disorder, self-harm assessment and management and medically unexplained symptoms. Following this, the plan was to assess the impact and effectiveness of the e-learning.

Methods: The selection of modules were based on requirements from E-lfh and collaboration with the Royal College of Psychiatrists. It was agreed that the modules should be designed with as much interactivity as possible for an e-learning package, aimed at a foundation doctor (not what should be expected from a psychiatry trainee or higher) and also to equip a doctor with fundamental psychiatric knowledge regardless of if they choose psychiatry as a career.

Two modules were redesigns of pre-existing modules – self harm and substance use disorder. These originally were four distinct modules (two for each of the topics). Therefore the learning for each module was redesigned and updated. Medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) and anxiety disorders were new modules.

Feedback has been obtained via the E-lfh website which collates feedback at the end of each module and scores content, presentation, interactivity, self-assessments and overall rating. A separate survey has also questioned foundation doctors in the Northern deanery about their accessing of e-learning and evaluation.

Results: On the E-lfh website, all 4 modules have been accessed with number of feedback left ranging from 3 (MUS) to 11 participants (substance use disorders). The scores rated content, presentation, interactivity, self-assessments and overall rating. All of which were rated 4.4/5 and above.

In the Northern deanery survey, out of 27 participants, only 1 had accessed the modules – MUS. The doctor had rated the session’s overall, clarity and relevance as good, with interactivity and engagement as average. They noted the difficulty as easy and rated their preparedness for psychiatry related cases as “somewhat prepared”.

Conclusion: Whilst the scores from the E-lfh portal suggest good feedback for the completed modules, the more local feedback suggests limited uptake for e-learning modules in general. Therefore, the next stage of the project will be to design focus groups to further elicit views of foundation doctors before a full report is generated with suggestions to improve uptake and accessibility.

Type
Education and Training
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of 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.