Public health physicians' knowledge of core skills and current policy: clinical audit by questionnaire

Background The aim of this study was to facilitate the assessment of the kn owledge of general public health physicians on a range of topics relating t o everyday areas of work and core skills, and to encourage learning in the process, by means of an educational clinical audit exercise. Methods A group of experts in different aspects of public health were asked to contribute multiple-choice questions. These were developed into a quest ionnaire that could be marked by computer. The questionnaire was circulated to all members of the Faculty registered for Continuing Professional Devel opment (CPD) and to specialist registrar members, but participation was vol untary. The experts marked answers according to a marking scheme against mo del answers ag reed. Results A total of 499 public health doctors returned answer sheets. There was no 'pass mark' as this was a learning exercise, not an examination. How ever, although the negative marking system meant that the possible range of scores was -100 per cent to 100 per cent, no one had a negative score. The median uncorrected result was 44 out of 80. Questions on communicable dise ase and critical appraisal had the highest scores, and one on Primary Care Trusts the lowest. Participants thought the most interesting questions were those on epidemiology and evidence-based medicine, whereas the most unpopu lar was on Personal Medical Services pilots. Most comments were favourable to the approach but several commented that the whole exercise was too gener al and questions outside their current area of specialization were irreleva nt. Conclusion The general public health physicians who took part in this audit appeared to be mainly competent in their knowledge of core skills and up t o date with current health policy issues. However, the audit raises a debat e about what 'core' knowledge is required in the post-training period. The place of UK-wide CPD initiatives over national or regional, or local approa ches needs consideration, as do potential regional or national variations i n CPD, This will receive further impetus because of revalidation and the ne ed to demonstrate valid CPD activities in public health medicine.