The need for basic sciences in the understanding and practice of anaesthesia.

Abstract

We conducted a survey using an unstructured, then a structured, questionnaire to determine the attitudes of 78 postfellowship anaesthetists to the Basic Sciences component of the part I examination for the FRCA. Seventy-two per cent replied. These anaesthetists felt that about 65% of the basic science syllabus was essential to the understanding and practice of everyday anaesthesia, but there was varying opinion as to the importance of specific topics. Cardiovascular, respiratory, central nervous system and renal physiology were all regarded as essential, as was the pharmacology of anaesthetic drugs. Topics regarded as irrelevant included biochemistry, endocrinology, membrane theory and immunology. Paradoxically, there were many topics which anaesthetists regarded as essential but on which they were unable to give a tutorial. There was little difference between the responses of consultants and trainees. This survey may help to identify a core syllabus on which the majority of anaesthetists agree but also suggests that the current syllabus is overloaded with detail that has no place in clinical practice.