Is the support that dental registrants in difficulty receive from postgraduate dental teams and other sources adequate?

Key Points Describes the views of dental registrants in difficulty on the support they receive form postgraduate dental teams. Compares their views on what constitutes the ideal supporter with the professional experience of supporters and their views on the strengths they bring to the role. Describes the views of registrants and supporters on the funding of the service. Reports the registrants' experience of support they receive from other organisations. Objective The aim of this research was to investigate the views of dental registrants in difficulty (DRiDS) on the support they received from postgraduate dental teams (PgDT) in Health Education England (HEE) and other sources. These data were complemented by the views of those appointed from the PgDT to support them on the service they provide. Method Qualitative data were collected by recording one-to-one semi structured telephone interviews, lasting approximately 30 minutes, with registrants in difficulty and supporters purposefully sampled from across England and Wales. Recordings were transcribed and the interview data analysed for recurring discourses and themes using thematic framework analysis. Setting and subjects All regional leads for DRiDs services in PgDT across the UK were asked to invite the DRiDs they were in contact with and the supporters they had appointed to contact the research team. Attempts were made to contact all who returned consent forms and six DRiDs and 11 supporters were eventually interviewed. Results Overall the DRiDs thought that the PgDT were very helpful. They were in many cases the only source of expert support and advice, particularly with regard to developing a personal development plan and collecting evidence about their practice to present to the regulator. There was a good match between the qualities that DRiDs wanted their supporters to have and the strengths supporters felt they brought to the role. The DRiDs had mixed views about the support provided by their indemnifiers and could not identify any other organisations that provided support once conditions had been imposed. Some had the support of peers; but both DRiDs and supporters felt there was a need for further support in addition to the educational support provided by PgDT and legal support provided by the indemnifier. Conclusion The DRiDS regarded the PgDT as their primary source of support and, in general, were very satisfied with the character and competence of the service.