You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
BASHH column
GUM trainees and workforce planning
  1. Andy J Williams1,
  2. Angela J Robinson2
  1. 1Ambrose King Centre, Royal London Hospital, London, UK
  2. 2GU/HIV Medicine, Mortimer Market Centre, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Andy Williams, Ambrose King Centre, Royal London Hospital, London E1 1BB, UK; andy.williams{at}bartsandthelondon.nhs.uk

https://doi.org/10.1136/sextrans-2011-050349

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Workforce planning is an inexact science. Crucial information such as consultant retirement plans and the actions of trusts in developing new posts, refilling vacancies and reconfiguring services in the face of financial pressures are unknowns. ‘Liberating the NHS’1 is likely to result in far-reaching consequences for the genitourinary medicine (GUM) workforce. Pension changes may result in more immediate workforce implications. Other variables such as ‘community working’, new commissioning arrangements, development of other specialties and actions of devolved nations will take time to impact.

    From the Health Protection Agency's 2010 data the number of sexually transmitted infections diagnosed in UK GUM clinics is 30% higher than a decade ago and the total number of services provided by clinics are four times higher than in 2001.2 The increasing workload has not resulted in equivalent GUM consultant expansion in the last 10 years. The 2010 Royal College of Physicians (RCP) data show a 5.4% increase from 2009 to 391 consultants.

    The RCP consultant census provides consultant workforce data and in 2009 was completed by only 45% …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.