Transcript: Episode Seven - Careers in the NHS with a focus on the Clinical Scientist Training programme
00:00:00:00 - 00:00:13:10
Speaker 1 - Daniel
Hello and welcome to the Medical Genetics and Genomics podcast from the University of Glasgow.
00:00:13:12 - 00:00:30:16
Speaker 1 – Daniel
My name is Daniel, I'm an alumni from the Medical Genetics course. Since leaving university, I've worked as a data handler on clinical trials, as a genetic technologist in the All-Wales Medical Genomic Service, and I'm a current trainee clinical scientist in the West of Scotland Centre for Genomic Medicine in Glasgow.
00:00:30:18 - 00:00:41:20
Speaker 2 - Alex
So, hi everyone, my names Alex. I was also on the MSc course with Daniel, and I have recently qualified as a clinical scientist down in Oxford, in England.
00:00:41:20 - 00:01:00:20
Speaker 1 – Daniel
In our previous episode, we heard from Courtney who was discussing routes into genetic counselling with Doctor Leah Marks and David Walker. Our guest for today is Lorna Crawford, current principal scientist and training officer at the West of Scotland Centre for Genomic Medicine, who is also an alumni of the course, and today we will be discussing her career and the clinical scientist training program in general.
00:01:01:21 - 00:01:07:14
Speaker 2 – Alex
First of all, Hi Lorna, thanks for coming on. I thought we'd start by, if you could, summarize your current career.
00:01:07:17 - 00:01:37:24
Speaker 3 - Lorna
Yeah, absolutely. So, I, as Daniel said, I am an alumni of Glasgow Uni. But not only did I do the Master's in Medical Genetics, I did the undergraduate in Genetics as well. I think I was always kind of heading towards genetics, although to be honest, I wasn't particularly studious in school. It wasn't until I got into fifth year and had a bit of a shock and realized I wasn't doing that well, that I decided I would probably have to pay a bit of attention, and realized that biology was something that I was particularly interested in.
00:01:37:24 - 00:02:08:16
Speaker 3 - Lorna
But I'm a twin sister, and I have a brother with Down's syndrome. So, I think genetics was always discussed in my family, and it was always something that I was interested in. So, it made sense just to go into genetics. And I was really lucky once I'd finished the Master’s and I knew about the training in clinical science, I managed to get straight onto a training scheme for clinical science in cytogenetics. And I completed that training scheme, and I worked for a while, and then I completed the diploma with the Royal College of Pathologists
00:02:08:16 - 00:02:25:04
Speaker 3 – Lorna
And at that point I was promoted into my principal scientist role. So, I've had a fairly standard progression through undergraduate in Genetics, through Master's in Medical Genetics, straight into training and I think that's quite rare these days to be able to just move your way through quite a streamlined career.
00:02:25:06 - 00:02:39:12
Speaker 2 – Alex
Yeah, I think it probably is fairly rare now, isn't it? I mean, my journey is fairly similar to Dan’s, you do the master's that kind of sets you up for it. The whole reason why I applied for it in the first place was because I kind of looked at the syllabus and I thought, well, that really is akin to what a trainee scientist is.
00:02:39:12 - 00:02:51:21
Speaker 2 – Alex
So, I thought it was always going to be something that was going to propel you into that career. But I certainly needed a few years, I had of other piece of experience, maybe that actually helped me get the job or the training scheme.
00:02:51:24 - 00:03:11:19
Speaker 1 - Daniel
Yeah, I was exactly the same. I had to do a couple of different jobs, get different experience. And I think it's helped me in the training now experiencing a completely different environment in clinical trials and then a similar environment in Cardiff from a technologist point of view. It just helps you then when you've seen it from the technologist and the scientist side. Lorna, you said you've got a brother with Down Syndrome.
00:03:11:19 - 00:03:14:18
Speaker 1 – Daniel
So, you really have a personal perspective on this as well.
00:03:14:20 - 00:03:29:23
Speaker 2 - Alex
One of the questions that I always ask people, because I'm always really interested in, is the whole reason why. I got into it is because my brother has epilepsy and autism and quite severe learning disabilities. I was always wondering why, because obviously he's my younger brother, and why has he been dealt this hand? Like why do I seem to be okay?
00:03:29:23 - 00:03:51:03
Speaker 2 – Alex
And the only real answer that I kept going back to was genetics, which was why I took such an interest in it. So, I always tend to ask people the same thing. What really got you into genetics? And honestly, now this is anecdotal not really evidence based, but I honestly think it's about 50% of people that I speak to are like, oh, I'm because of my family, or I know someone, or there's like a real personal experience with genetics.
00:03:51:03 - 00:04:01:13
Speaker 2 - Alex
And I think that's, I think it's honestly why the genetics as a whole, like the community, I do find that it's so personal I've always found that it's a lot easier to connect with people in this profession.
00:04:01:16 - 00:04:13:08
Speaker 3 – Lorna
And I think that early spark of interest really propels you into your career, no matter what it is. And I think if you've had any conversations about genetics, it's a really interesting area. So, you always want to learn more about it.
00:04:13:10 - 00:04:25:23
Speaker 1 – Daniel
If we go back to sort of the start of your career, you were talking about Lorna. You obviously did the training, got registered. I was just wondering how you found the training program itself? And also, how you feel it is different from the training today other than obvious advancements?
00:04:26:04 - 00:04:51:18
Speaker 3 – Lorna
Yeah, I think given that we all work in genetics, or genomics these days, it's continually changing, and the training schemes change so much over the years. When I trained, I trained just in clinical cytogenetics, and I had a four-year scheme. So, two years was a kind of training scheme, and we still did modules, but it was through inherited and somatic cytogenetic disorders.
00:04:51:18 - 00:05:10:10
Speaker 3 – Lorna
So, we’d do FISH and cyto, and obviously showing my age here, we weren't even doing microarrays back then never mind NGS. So, things were certainly different, and I think that two-year training and then a further two years consolidating meant that you had four years really to embed in the department before you became a registered clinical scientist.
00:05:10:15 - 00:05:38:14
Speaker 3 – Lorna
There were also differences in that you had to spend a month in a different network lab. So, we worked quite closely with the other network labs, and you had to spend a whole month working with one of them and write up a paper on what the differences between those two laboratories were. Which taught you not only how to network with other people in the other centres, but also what differences there were between strategies and techniques used in the different network labs, which I think was really beneficial back then as well.
00:05:38:19 - 00:05:57:18
Speaker 3 - Lorna
And now, I think we're trying to squeeze all of genomics into a three-year scheme and I think it's really tricky to do that. We're constantly trying to figure out how it's possible to do that, which is why in Scotland the training’s changed. So back in, back when I did it was called the A grade and the B grade training scheme.
00:05:57:18 - 00:06:10:00
Speaker 3 – Lorna
But we've had about four different training schemes since then and now have the training scheme that Daniel here’s on. I think it's been successful, but I have no doubt it will change continually because genomics is always changing.
00:06:10:02 - 00:06:30:08
Speaker 1 – Daniel
Now, the networking aspect of it, I think we don't have as much opportunity for anymore, which I think is something that’s useful, we've had a few more recently. I think probably COVID contributed to that as well, is something that I've found helpful just to see the perspective of the other labs within Scotland from a trainee point of view, because even some of the way they handle training can have slight differences.
00:06:30:10 - 00:06:40:18
Speaker 3 – Lorna
Yeah, because the sizes of all the laboratories are completely different and the techniques that they're testing are different. So, you do get a completely different perspective if you can manage to get in and see another lab.
00:06:40:20 - 00:06:46:00
Speaker 2 – Alex
You know, in Scotland in general with the, with the sort of labs, is it just four major labs?
00:06:46:06 - 00:06:47:12
Speaker 1 - Daniel
It's just the four labs at the moment.
00:06:47:13 - 00:07:05:14
Speaker 2 – Alex
When I first heard about how Scotland had structured it, that sounds fairly straight forward in terms of you've got four labs, they're going to cover certain areas that kind of makes sense. So, I don't know who does the mitochondrial testing for example, it's probably only going to be one of the four labs because it's a highly specialized service that's going to be fairly rare
00:07:05:14 - 00:07:25:16
Speaker 2 – Alex
And so, I was thinking when, because England have moved towards, so they call them GLH’s now, because of this genomic medicine services now, that you have certain labs that are now taking over most of the work. So, you've got Birmingham are the GLH, the genomic laboratory hub, for the southeast and central and it's something like 26 million people it covers.
00:07:25:16 - 00:07:48:01
Speaker 2 - Alex
And the work up for that, and the teething problems is a factor. You're moving all of the wet work, all of your WGS, all of your, the whole infrastructure of it is then moving to one lab for 26 million people. And then you've got all these supplementary regional labs like Oxford, Wessex and Southampton, and they're really scaling down
00:07:48:04 - 00:08:16:17
Speaker 2 - Alex
And then you've got Birmingham that have picked up all the work, and I think they've probably looked at Scotland, that have been fairly successful with that. But I think the sheer scale, the volume of people just hasn't. We've had quite a few teething problems in England for that, but we, I think we still have our highly specialized services. But the bulk of the work has gone to these bigger labs and I don't know whether that is fairly similar to Scotland or whether we were just sort of deem that as a completely different kettle of fish because of the sheer volume of people.
00:08:16:19 - 00:08:38:05
Speaker 3 – Lorna
The network labs in Scotland have always had more of a kind of collaboration attitude. I think in England you're competing for work quite often, whereas in Scotland it's all funded and we share the workload. So, if there is a way that we can maintain the testing within Scotland, we do and we try to do that in the most efficient way that we can.
00:08:38:05 - 00:09:14:10
Speaker 3 – Lorna
So, we'll pick a lab, like you say mitochondrial is only dealt with in one lab, so it doesn't make sense to put it anywhere else. But over the years there have been some slight concerns and when NGS came in I think a lot of the Scottish labs thought everything's going to go onto NGS, they will want NGS machines in every lab and therefore there's going to be one wet lab and they're going to put out the results of the other lab. And it's always been a bit of a fear, and I wouldn't say in the future that things won't change, but I think it's quite nice in Scotland at the moment, that the four laboratories split the work between them and collaborate as best that we can.
00:09:14:12 - 00:09:30:16
Speaker 1 – Daniel
So, obviously, I know you've got a number of different roles, but looking at sort of the principal scientist and the training officer within the lab and you were a clinical scientist for a period. Did you find that becoming a senior member of staff sort of affected the way you worked, your relationships and did you feel comfortable with that increased responsibility?
00:09:30:18 - 00:09:50:01
Speaker 3 - Lorna
Becoming more senior within any role changes any relationship that you have, changes the dynamic between people and it was difficult at the time because I wasn't actually out of training for that long when I got my promoted position and I was promoted above a lot of people who had trained me as well, which gave a completely different dynamic.
00:09:50:01 - 00:10:22:11
Speaker 3 - Lorna
But I never found it to be much of an issue. I think I accepted that relationships would change. I think the issue comes when you try to maintain friendships and relationships and try to make them the same. I think you have to accept that the dynamics are going to change between people, when the dynamic changes within a professional relationship and the responsibility was a massive increase at that point because again, back when I got my principal scientist role, only the principal scientists, only the grade eights and above would authorise any reports.
00:10:22:11 - 00:10:47:17
Speaker 3 - Lorna
And I was promoted into running the prenatal cytogenetics service. So, all prenatal cytogenetic reports would be sitting at my desk at 3:30, 4:00 in the afternoon, ready for my signature, to go out to the midwives to tell the patients that night. So, the responsibility was massive, and it was a huge jump up from being a band 7 who could just do the work and pass on the report to being the person where really the buck stops with you.
00:10:47:20 - 00:10:55:11
Speaker 3 - Lorna
But although it was a steep learning curve, it was really good to make that jump at that stage and take on that responsibility.
00:10:55:13 - 00:11:01:19
Speaker 1 - Daniel
With this training officer position, was training always something that you were interested in? Was it just something that appealed to you when it came up?
00:11:01:23 - 00:11:26:20
Speaker 3 - Lorna
Yeah, training was always something that I was interested in, I always kind of dabbled in training. I did a lot of public engagement. I made a lot of their work experience blocks that we have at the moment was created when I was trying to push public engagement. I set up the work experience as a band 7. Work experience & Public engagement training were always areas of interest for me, but really one of the biggest draws for the training officer position.
00:11:26:20 - 00:11:59:09
Speaker 3 – Lorna
So, when I started cytogenetics was a completely different department and it then merged with molecular genetics, molecular haematology, molecular pathology into one big Genomics and Molecular Pathology department and I was running prenatal cytogenetics, as I said, but I felt that I was in a very small area within the lab, whereas, the training officer had oversight of all of the new areas, and it was just an opportunity for me to step out of prenatal cyto, and actually learn all the different areas that have joined together into the big department.
00:11:59:09 - 00:12:08:20
Speaker 3 – Lorna
So, I think I've always been somebody who wanted to keep learning and keep pushing myself and that was why the training position really, was so, yeah, was something that I wanted to do.
00:12:08:24 - 00:12:32:22
Speaker 2 - Alex
So, you obviously took the training manager job in 2014, and I've noticed that you've got a few publications that sort of span across from when your core responsibilities would have been a scientist, and then you'd moved into that training role and you're still writing these publications. I just wondered whether was there an innate drive to keep publications up? or was, well, the responsibility of training and sort of saying oh these can take a backseat.
00:12:32:22 - 00:12:49:08
Speaker 2 - Alex
I prefer doing the training. And how did you sort of, because obviously there's so many different routes and, why not routes. But there's so many different avenues that you can go down on as a scientist specialist as you get more senior, I suppose you can go down these routes whether you want to, you know, sort of lean into research a little bit more or go down the training route.
00:12:49:08 - 00:12:56:21
Speaker 2 – Alex
What, apart from the drive of enjoying teaching and going down that route, what other options did you have? And I suppose why did you really stick to the training route?
00:12:56:23 - 00:13:22:09
Speaker 3 – Lorna
Yeah. So, I suppose the other options mainly were to stay within a principal scientist role within the service and I love prenatal genetics and that really is my area that I like to talk about, I like to learn more about. I think the biggest issue with stepping out into the training was not having that oversight of prenatal. And I struggled with handing that off to someone else, if I'm honest, because that was what I was in charge of.
00:13:22:09 - 00:13:42:09
Speaker 3 – Lorna
That was my area and that was, you know, my expertise was all in that area. So, the publications, I was just lucky to work with lots of usually clinical specialists that were coming through that were interested in taking the information that we had within the laboratory and matching it up with patient information, which was an area I was interested in as well.
00:13:42:12 - 00:14:02:10
Speaker 3 - Lorna
So, I performed quite a lot of data audits and worked with them to match that up to patients and usually the research elements were people approaching me rather than the other way around. So, I've never been a researcher and it's not my passion to research. It's more my passion is to really enhance genomics knowledge.
00:14:02:10 - 00:14:16:10
Speaker 3 – Lorna
So, if someone approaches me and wants me to collaborate then I'm perfectly happy to do it. But I was never really interested in going down a research route, like you say, there's lots of different routes that you can go down, and I've thought of going down a few of them. I do have a lot of different roles at the moment.
00:14:16:10 - 00:14:40:17
Speaker 3 - Lorna
I think, probably, I will have to pear those back rather than taking on anymore. But I love training and I've looked at more kind of accreditation roles and maybe Scottish Government roles, and I think I've managed to get somewhere where I dabble in a lot of these roles without actually having to make a jump, which is quite nice when you can dabble in it, you can see whether you like it, and you can decide for the future whether you want to make a change.
00:14:40:23 - 00:14:50:01
Speaker 3 - Lorna
I think what I do is leave myself open to lots of opportunities, and that means that, you know, I'm never fixed into one area there’s always other areas that I can move into.
00:14:50:03 - 00:15:12:12
Speaker 2 - Alex
So, I think that leads in quite nicely to, it's probably quite a selfish question from my point of view, just because I was looking at the NHS Education for Scotland, and I know that it sort of started in 2002, I think and obviously you just finished your Master's at that point. What is NHS education for Scotland? and how does it differ from just the training scheme or just the NHS diagnostic services in general?
00:15:12:12 - 00:15:40:07
Speaker 3 – Lorna
Ok, so NHS education for Scotland is a health board in and of itself and they are tasked with education, training and workforce planning across all of medicine and all of health care, and now public health as well. So, the health care science team, like you say, was just set up in 2002 and at that point, there was only one person in the team, and they were tasked with investigating training options for health care science across Scotland.
00:15:40:09 - 00:16:01:02
Speaker 3 – Lorna
So again, my move into NHS education for Scotland was a move from prenatal cytogenetics to all of genomics, to all of health care science. So, I now work in training across all over 50 disciplines in health care science. The team has grown from one person to five people, but they’re all part-time apart from one person.
00:16:01:02 - 00:16:16:05
Speaker 3 – Lorna
So, it's actually only 2.8 full time equivalents within that team and we're tasked with basically quality assurance, commissioning and some elements of continual professional development, across health care science.
00:16:16:09 - 00:16:24:19
Speaker 2 – Alex
I was just, I was just going to sort of summarize the fact that that sounds impossible to actually achieve for only 2.8 people.
00:16:24:21 - 00:16:32:04
Speaker 3 - Lorna
No, it feels that on a day-to-day basis, I have to say, I think it probably is. Yeah, it's impossible. But we try our best.
00:16:32:06 - 00:16:44:23
Speaker 1 – Daniel
i was just going to ask if, because you've got sort of oversight of all the different training schemes, if you lean into them when you're looking at kind of the training scheme that I'm doing, do you then take things from these other training schemes and try to incorporate them?
00:16:45:03 - 00:17:13:06
Speaker 3 – Lorna
Yeah, absolutely. Especially so. At the moment within NES, I'm head of quality assurance for health care science. So, I ask a lot of questions on the quality of training across all the different schemes, and I do get a lot of hints and tips back. You know, if I ask somebody for, you know, how they collect feedback from the trainees and they send me some sort of form, I quite often have a little look through it. One from a quality perspective within NES, but also selfishly from a quality perspective.
00:17:13:06 - 00:17:40:05
Speaker 3 - Lorna
Within genomics, although I have these different roles, they're quite similar, they're both training. I'm interested in the quality of the training across the board. So, if I can take anything from other schemes and put them into genomics, then I absolutely do. But I also try to promote it within the other healthcare science streams as well. So quite often another scheme will come to me and say that they're having trouble gaining feedback or they want to improve, and I can take that knowledge and pass across to the different streams.
00:17:40:05 - 00:17:49:09
Speaker 2 – Alex
I'm wondering if you want to move into a space now where we talk about sort of overall about the STP and the opportunities to actually get into healthcare from an entry level point of view.
00:17:49:12 - 00:18:13:00
Speaker 1 – Daniel
Yeah. So, the training program in Scotland is, since they've moved away from the STP, we now register through an equivalence route and there is really just, there's no direct agreement in place with HCPC for direct entry onto the register. So, the equivalence route is basically to prove that we meet the standards required of clinical scientists. So rather than getting direct entry, you prove your equivalence to those standards.
00:18:13:00 - 00:18:21:20
Speaker 2 – Alex
So, has that recently changed? How come it's not through like directly with the HCPC? Why did that stop? Because I would have thought you'd have done that before.
00:18:21:23 - 00:18:51:00
Speaker 3 – Lorna
Yeah. It's just the STP that's got that agreement with the HCPC. So, there's, the HCPC accredit certain treatment schemes and university academic courses or direct entry to the institute of biomedical science have an agreement that they can have direct entry onto the BMS register given certain parameters and the STP scheme has that in place. Scotland have never had that in place for any of their schemes, but what we used to have in place was an agreement with the ACS.
00:18:51:00 - 00:19:10:21
Speaker 3 - Lorna
So, the Association of Clinical Scientists. We used to have an agreement that we could have a shorter portfolio. So, a shorter equivalence route from the Scottish training. That was a UK training at that point. But when the STP came in, Scotland started using the STP and had direct entry onto the HCPC, and then when they moved away from it, you just don't have that agreement in place.
00:19:10:21 - 00:19:20:02
Speaker 3 – Lorna
So, it is something that Scotland could do, but it's a lot of paperwork, a lot of work and it would need agreement with the HCPC to have that direct entry.
00:19:20:04 - 00:19:25:17
Speaker 2 - Alex
It's still fairly akin to the STP in England, it's just the agreements are slightly different.
00:19:25:21 - 00:19:58:03
Speaker 3 – Lorna
Yeah, and that the Scottish scheme was certainly you know, we looked at the old scheme, the old UK scheme, we looked at the STP scheme. We had conversations within the consortium about what it is that we wanted to train in and so, for example, the, the STP scheme has rotations in biochemistry and reproductive science as well as histopathology, haematology and we felt that we really benefited from the haematology and histopathology for the liquid pathology route, but not particularly so much the biochemistry.
00:19:58:05 - 00:20:19:17
Speaker 3 – Lorna
And although the reproductive science was interesting, it wasn't something that we had a real direct link with. So, we wanted to keep the haematology and histopathology rotations, but not particularly the biochemistry and the reproductive science. So, we wanted to design the training scheme in Scotland around what disorders that we tested in Scotland and what we wanted the trainees to know when they came out
00:20:19:17 - 00:20:21:10
Speaker 3 – Lorna
So, we designed our own scheme.
00:20:21:12 - 00:20:41:16
Speaker 2 – Alex
That sounds fantastic to me, and the other big difference isn't there that between the two, England and Scotland, sort of, STP routes is the fact that we do a part time master's alongside our three year and you guys don't need to do that do you? I can see benefits to both.
00:20:41:18 - 00:20:58:13
Speaker 2 - Alex
Because, I think you’ll know better than me and Dan here, but the A Grade. I hear a lot about the A grade because a lot of the scientists that I work with did the A grade training, and they'll often, especially because I'm newly registered whenever I speak to them or work together
00:20:58:13 - 00:21:19:13
Speaker 2 - Alex
There is a big gulf in, sort of, the expectation about what I can do as a newly registered scientist compared to what they did in their A grade training, and I think it's nice to have from the STP a sort of overall, very surface level sort of exposure to everything. So, you get a nice, rounded sort of education that means you are the sort of budding scientist.
00:21:19:13 - 00:21:42:08
Speaker 2 – Alex
So, you're good at entry level, like you can do the basics, you know your remit, you know your own limitations and you just grow from there. So, yeah, I think it's, it is really interesting to see how they differ, and yeah, I think the Master's one, Dan in particular, I thought I'd ask you do you feel because you did the Glasgow Master’s, do you feel like that was enough?
00:21:42:08 - 00:21:52:09
Speaker 2 - Alex
and then sort of on-the-job training. Not just enough, but it felt like that was what was needed rather than having another, you know, part of education? [Daniel: Yeah]
00:21:52:09 - 00:22:09:15
Speaker 1 – Daniel
No, I definitely feel like the MSc in Glasgow sort of gives you a good grounding of everything. It’s so tailored to the STP really and I've even found going into things like going into new modules and things like that, I mean, I’m by no means an expert when I go into new modules, but it is there, I've seen it before.
00:22:09:15 - 00:22:38:11
Speaker 1 – Daniel
It's not brand-new information to me. So that's definitely helpful. I don't know, maybe a another doing the master's is part of it would be helpful. But I kind of feel like there's better ways to spend your time rather than the sort of academic side of writing essays and things like that. I think it's much better once you get our stage to be hands on, involved in diagnostic scenarios, which I think is I mean, you'll be able to say Lorna, what I think is kind of the idea with the of Scottish training is to get more hands on more sort of embedded into the lab.
00:22:38:13 - 00:22:55:23
Speaker 3 - Lorna
I was just going to say, what we found in Scotland was that the applicants generally already had a masters or a PhD, so you were repeating a lot of the knowledge that they already had, and a lot of the master’s that we found they were going to down south they sort of were they weren't quite as tailored as the medical genetics, I would say, in Glasgow.
00:22:55:23 - 00:23:18:07
Speaker 3 – Lorna
So, I think a lot of the lectures that they were going to, they were coming back and discussing quite high level topics, but not as applicable to what we did in the genetics master’s, the medical genetics master’s and we're very lucky in the department to have huge links with the medical genetics master’s and we can tap into their resources and work closely with them and we provide some of the lectures.
00:23:18:12 - 00:23:39:04
Speaker 3 - Lorna
W
We can tap into their resources and work closely with them, and we provide some of the lectures. You know, if we could take trainees with that master's or we could take trainees with PhD’s and other master’s. There was really no point sending them for another one. But we do notice slight issues in Scotland when we take people on without that background knowledge, because we're not providing that academic content. So, we're looking at the moment how to try to back that up.
00:23:39:04 - 00:23:57:14
Speaker 3 – Lorna
How can we find that academic content elsewhere? We can use the master's resources but there's
also a lot of resources out there and a lot of different areas that we can use to try and back that up and we do in Scotland need to be a bit better at giving those and pointing the trainees and that direction if they haven't got their master's in Medical Genetics.
00:23:57:17 - 00:24:14:01
Speaker 2 - Alex
Looking at it from the other end of the telescope, I think that's why I think the English one does quite well in terms of they'll get someone who they think fits the mould to become a great scientist in but they only have an undergrad in biology, but they know that they have the attributes and they will become a good scientist and they see the potential in them.
00:24:14:01 - 00:24:20:03
Speaker 2 - Alex
And I think that's where the part time master's probably helps them specifically. So yeah, interesting to see the differences.
00:24:20:05 - 00:24:29:17
Speaker 1 – Daniel
Another difference, but it’s the application process. I think the English one is a bit more complicated and involved than the Scottish application in terms of this steps you have to go through.
00:24:29:23 - 00:24:53:04
Speaker 2 - Alex
Yeah, I think it's changed a little bit now. Certainly, when I did it there was 3 or 4 steps. So, it's like an initial application. There's just sort of outlined questions to say like, what your sort of experience is, your education and whether do you fit with the NHS constitution really and you just had to give examples of why you'd be a good fit to work for the NHS
00:24:53:04 - 00:25:08:21
Speaker 2 - Alex
And after that, that was sort of aptitude tests. So, I remember like, there was a logic test that managed to save me because my maths wasn't fantastic. So, there was like, they used to give you questions that you can all practice online there's loads of aptitude testing lists, this step has loads of links if you just Google it.
00:25:08:21 - 00:25:29:04
Speaker 2 - Alex
But there was like quick maths questions which were, I always found really difficult. So, I had to really practice for those with those like logic tests where it was just like shapes and patterns, pattern recognition, and there was like literature as well and then after that you would have like a speed date somewhere. So, it was like Birmingham or somewhere. But I was the year of COVID, so that actually got cancelled
00:25:29:04 - 00:25:53:13
Speaker 2 - Alex
But I had basically a zoom interview with the lab that I basically picked as a first choice. So, in England, once you get so far, once you get longlisted after your initial application, you're able to basically choose like locations based on priority and you can just pick all of every lab in the country if you want to. Or if you want to live in a specific place or work in a specific lab, you can just put them at the top or you can work it whichever way you want.
00:25:53:13 - 00:26:21:21
Speaker 2 – Alex
And, yeah, I got Oxford and, had the interview with my training officer Jen at the time, and yeah, I got through that. But I think it has changed. I think it's still a similar sort of scenario where there is sort of a written initial application, and then you’re long listed and then there's a similar sort of aptitude test, but I don't think just there’re three ones that I said. I think there's stuff like dexterity and mini questions, and then you go into the interviews.
00:26:21:24 - 00:26:34:02
Speaker 2 – Alex
I think they’re moving back towards the sort of speed dating scenarios. So, you get like stations of different, scientists that will ask you questions and they're just quickfire answers and you just get around speed dating tables.
00:26:34:02 - 00:26:42:04
Speaker 1 – Daniel
I think basically all jobs in NHS Scotland have the same three questions but obviously you tailor your answer to the role you’re applying for.
00:26:42:06 - 00:27:06:20
Speaker 3 – Lorna
We all use the Job Train system in that instead of the trainees been centrally recruited. The health boards themselves, in the departments themself, recruit the trainees within Scotland. We used to recruit centrally within Scotland for genomics, and we used to all sit down and go through all the applications together as a network, and they would all get recruited into Tayside.
00:27:06:22 - 00:27:29:06
Speaker 3 – Lorna
So, all trainees would be employed officially by Tayside and would just work in the different centres. So that changed just a few years ago now, I think four years ago now, where we decided that we would actually just recruit our own trainees so that, as Dan said, the process is the same for any job within the NHS. You would apply on the job train system, then you would go for a 1 to 1 interview in Scotland.
00:27:29:06 - 00:27:34:13
Speaker 3 - Lorna
So, it's very, very different. There's no aptitude tests. it's just a standard interview process.
00:27:34:13 - 00:27:36:09
Speaker 1 – Daniel
And extremely competitive.
00:27:36:11 - 00:27:41:12
Speaker 2 - Alex
Oh yeah, I can imagine. How many places are there normal every year in Scotland?
00:27:41:14 - 00:28:02:00
Speaker 3 - Lorna
For genomics in Scotland, we try to take on 7 or 8 trainees per year. Sometimes we don't get that many. I think last year we got one, and this year we're up at seven. Even within just Glasgow I think the last time, so two years ago, I think we had 250-300 applicants for the four positions.
00:28:02:01 - 00:28:03:07
Speaker 3 - Lorna
So, it is extremely competitive.
00:28:03:12 - 00:28:14:01
Speaker 2 – Alex
And so, you guys don't have cancer genomics and genomics, do you? or do like trainees or is it just genomics and then people branch out into their specialisms once they get in?
00:28:14:01 - 00:28:44:05
Speaker 3 - Lorna
Yes, the scheme we used to have, we used to have the STP genomics scheme and we used to have a molecular pathology scheme in Scotland and when we wrote the new scheme that Dan’s on, we decided that we just wanted one with module choices across inherited and somatic. So, it's just one scheme and how the networks want to do it, whether they want to crossover and have some trainees who have inherited and somatic modules, or whether they want to streamline them into one or the other, is up to the networks.
00:28:44:06 - 00:29:10:12
Speaker 3 - Lorna
You basically need to have credits, so each modules got a credit, and you need 150 credits, and you can choose whichever module that works for your lab. We've changed it within Glasgow. We've had some trainees who've worked across somatic and inherited but again, I think to ask trainees to learn everything in three years is impossible. So, we've now moved back to specializing in either inherited or somatic.
00:29:10:14 - 00:29:30:10
Speaker 3 - Lorna
But the issue with that sometimes is you finish your training and get put into to the other stream, and you finish and start again, so I'm not sure we're ever going to get it right. I think we try to hedge our bets and try and teach the trainees everything, but that was too difficult to do and then we try and work out where the trainees might end up after three years.
00:29:30:10 - 00:29:39:21
Speaker 3 – Lorna
And that's very difficult to do because the landscapes continually changing and so we've never got it right so far but maybe, maybe some years we’ll manage to train the trainees.
00:29:39:21 - 00:29:56:11
Speaker 2 - Alex
Yeah, it’s difficult isn’t it, obviously, if they're picking modules to sort of tailor their training to go, like you say, down inherited or somatic by the time it comes around to actually applying for jobs, that landscape is completely different then. You don't know who's left. You don't know where that's coming from. So, you can't, I don't think there is really an answer to that.
00:29:56:11 - 00:30:15:07
Speaker 2 - Alex
Is there really, unless you, just like you say, if they do have the option to specialize, maybe say, actually, I don't know how it works whether the trainees can just pick so and so you have three trainees. I don't know whether you would just allow them all to go down the somatic route if they all chose it, or would you have to tailor it to make sure you had at least one going down the inherited?
00:30:15:12 - 00:30:37:06
Speaker 3 - Lorna
Yeah, we tend to take on four in Glasgow and we try to do two in inherited and two in somatic, but we do look at the background of the trainees to see which way they might be more comfortable. So quite often we’ll have a, you know, a trainee whose got a PhD in cancer genomics. So, it's obvious that they would be more comfortable with the somatic route and others who are definitely more interested,
00:30:37:06 - 00:30:47:12
Speaker 3 - Lorna
in an inherited route. So, we do try to tailor it slightly for the background knowledge and what their interests are because if you're interested in something, you do a lot better than if your thrown into something that you're not interested in.
00:30:47:12 - 00:30:56:00
Speaker 2 - Alex
Yeah. For sure. So is that, does that sort of come down to the recruitment process then do you look for that two and two when you're actually looking at the candidates first of all. [Lorna: Yeah.]
00:30:56:04 - 00:31:05:01
Speaker 3 – Lorna
Yeah, so quite often before we do go into recruitment, we'll have a look at what positions that we have and where they are and look at the candidate's background and try to match that up.
00:31:05:07 - 00:31:28:12
Speaker 2 - Alex
Yeah. So, we just have two entirely different specialisms down in England. We have cancer genomics and genomics. Genomics I think is far broader obviously within its nature, but the sort of cancer genomics is, it does sound specialised, but they get to see a lot more that will go to cellular pathology, histopathology or molecular haematology, things like that.
00:31:28:14 - 00:31:49:15
Speaker 2 - Alex
They see a lot more and they also still dabble in the inherited cancer. So, they still get that core knowledge from, you know, sort of germline, constitutional stuff and then like I say, they've got this somatic sort of specialty as well. So, it is quite interesting, especially because I've gone from, I was doing the genomics training and doing fairly limited somatic work really.
00:31:49:15 - 00:32:05:22
Speaker 2 - Alex
I had a few rotations here and there over in molecular haematology, but it wasn't my sort of go to, like you say, if you were the one who saw my application, you would say, oh yeah, he's definitely going down the genomics route and then in the end I'm the inherited cancer team and we work a lot with molecular haematology.
00:32:05:22 - 00:32:24:12
Speaker 2 - Alex
Now doing FFP’s for Lynch and all sorts so I'm always speaking to those lot. And it was one of those situations where I haven't had to start from ground zero. Like you say, I've not tailored and gone completely genomics now, and then I'm somatic, but I can see the steep learning curve when I do speak to people in the somatic team.
00:32:24:16 - 00:32:42:03
Speaker 2 - Alex
But yeah, I've got to really switch my brain into that sort of, into their world, into their realm of thinking. So, but it's all good stuff in that, like, the more you learn the more enjoyable it is. I think, like, it's nice to have your specialism, but if you can go into that realm, it's still similar enough,
00:32:42:03 - 00:32:53:01
Speaker 2 - Alex
that you can still get on with it and it is a steep learning curve, but you’ll still be able to do the job. It's still yeah, the training is still good enough in my opinion to, for you to move over into that. So, I don't think
00:32:53:03 - 00:33:13:13
Speaker 3 – Lorna
The basic principles are the same. They're both genomic. But you, I've had some trainees who thought they had no interest in somatic and have gone down a somatic route in the end and absolutely love it and would never move and vice versa. I think sometimes you have fixed in your head what it is you enjoy and actually, when you look into the other aspects of genomics, you find something else that you really enjoy.
00:33:13:15 - 00:33:21:12
Speaker 1 – Daniel
And also thinking about, sort of recruitment and stuff just for people that are listening. Do you have any sort of advice for people that would be applying for it?
00:33:21:17 - 00:33:48:03
Speaker 3 - Lorna
Yeah. So, in Scotland the clinical scientist trainee jobs, are funded from NHS education for Scotland and the funding starts on the 1st of September. So generally, all healthcare science schemes try and get the positions advertised and recruited before the 1st of September or they technically lose that first bit of funding. So that means that we always say the spring where that creates a pretty wide, timescale.
00:33:48:08 - 00:34:11:10
Speaker 3 - Lorna
But anywhere, from March, I think some of the healthcare science teams are recruited in March, Genomics tend to be towards kind of May time when we start recruiting. So, job should go out around May and interviewed in June and ready for that September start and my advice usually I get a lot of contacts through to NES asking for advice.
00:34:11:12 - 00:34:31:18
Speaker 3 - Lorna
And I think my advice would be to understand what the job is. I think a lot of people think they want to be a clinical scientist but imagine themselves with a white lab coat on standing and actually getting their hands dirty doing the techniques and that is not a clinical scientist job. It really comes across when you write an application, whether you understand what the job is that you're going for or not.
00:34:31:23 - 00:34:48:22
Speaker 3 – Lorna
And if you don't understand what the job is, it kind of shows that you've not done your homework enough and you’re not interested enough. So, my first advice would be, make sure you understand what the job is, what people do day to day and also have a look at the other tasks. So, it's not just about the disorders, but if you understand what disorders and what techniques are used, great.
00:34:48:24 - 00:35:12:11
Speaker 3 – Lorna
If you can link that to your experience, even better. Think about the quality management roles, the training roles, all the different roles that make up the clinical scientist and think about how your experience matches to those and try and get that across in your application because people generally forget about all these other rules and they’re so important within a diagnostics lab, if you can get that knowledge and that experience across in your application, then you're going to stand out.
00:35:12:16 - 00:35:30:15
Speaker 2 - Alex
Yeah, that's great advice, especially because the training scheme is tailored towards sort of the you learn the diseases, you learn what the techniques are. You don't, you know, the bulk of the application doesn't need to imply that you already know these things, but it's about showing why you would be good and that you think outside the box and like you say.
00:35:30:15 - 00:35:54:10
Speaker 2 - Alex
You look at all these other different avenues that you can go down. And I suppose for the English ones, the English STP, so, I was just looking at the dates. So, as I said they put the long list out, outcomes. So that's from your initial application and then once they've read it and given you the long list outcome, that's normally 15th of March, from around middle of March. I think the posts go out around January where you'll write your initial application.
00:35:54:10 - 00:36:14:10
Speaker 2 – Alex
Then if you’re long listed, find out about middle of March and then you'll get your sort of aptitude tests, and then you'll find out around May. And then you'll get to sort of post your locations. They'll basically publish the locations across the country. So, you know, sometimes labs have more, one year or less the next, or whatever it may be.
00:36:14:10 - 00:36:32:17
Speaker 2 - Alex
And you'll get to then pick which, what priority location you want and then you had the virtual interviews or in-person interviews. I don't know which way they'll do it at this time, but I think it was virtual last year, if I remember correctly. But I don't know if they're going to go towards that speed dating again, which was like prior to COVID.
00:36:32:19 - 00:36:40:24
Speaker 2 - Alex
But that's normally around like end of May, early June time and then you get a confirmed place you’ll be starting in September. So that's sort of timescale for that one.
00:36:41:01 - 00:36:50:02
Speaker 3 – Lorna
Quite a long process from first application in January all the way to a September start. So, you have to be sure that that you want that and be prepared for it.
00:36:50:03 - 00:37:09:05
Speaker 2 – Alex
Yeah, I remember it vividly because I remember it being freezing cold. It was literally the start of January, and it was baltic and then I remember when I found out I was literally, I just remember it being absolutely roasting that summer and I was like, how long has this been, this process? Like just to go through three steps to try and get a position?
00:37:09:05 - 00:37:27:12
Speaker 2 - Alex
I remember I literally went through three seasons to figure out if I've got the place or not. So, it is a long process, but I suppose, like you were saying about the Scottish ones, how competitive they are, they've got to go through so many applications, and do it as evenly as possible. It must be an incredibly long journey for them.
00:37:27:12 - 00:37:48:10
Speaker 2 – Alex
So, now what are pre-reg positions like in Scotland? So, the way that the sort of English ones are posted, it's sort of like they're almost advertised as just like band 7s on like websites on just NHS England sort of job roles as rather than this independent STP sort of application but they're sort of advertised as sevens
00:37:48:10 - 00:38:01:14
Speaker 2 – Alex
But then if you're looking towards completing a portfolio, then you can go in as a six and then upon registration you become a seven sort of thing. I Just wondered if pre-reg, pre-registration position band 6 are the same in Scotland?
00:38:01:20 - 00:38:24:20
Speaker 3 - Lorna
We don't we don't tend to advertise pre-reg positions. We tend to just similarly advertise a clinical scientist position and see whether we get anyone on the register, or anyone almost on the register and we’ll take it from there and we also have something called a band 6 analyst role within Scotland and that someone whose analysing in a band 6 position, but not on the register.
00:38:24:22 - 00:38:28:19
Speaker 3 – Lorna
So that's a very different role and it's a very new role within Scotland.
00:38:29:00 - 00:38:34:18
Speaker 2 – Alex
What's the difference between the band 6 pre-regs that would get the job compared to the band 6 analysts?
00:38:34:21 - 00:38:57:00
Speaker 3 - Lorna
The jobs are probably relatively similar, but I would guess the pre-regs probably have a higher level of knowledge when they come in, because they're kind of further on to that registration process. Whereas the band 6 analysts aren't expected to register, obviously they're gaining experience, which means that they could register through an equivalence route at some point, but it's not something that they're taken on to do.
00:38:57:02 - 00:39:12:05
Speaker 3 - Lorna
They're taken on to do, you know, the first check analysis, the steps kind of before the clinical scientist would take over so they wouldn't authorize the reports, and they wouldn't do certain things. So, it is a distinct job role, and it's not one that's officially leading up to registration.
00:39:12:09 - 00:39:35:07
Speaker 2 - Alex
That to be honest, that does sound good. I can imagine that being a good way to actually start your career as to become a scientist, because obviously the pre-reg positions are again, very competitive. So, and like we've said, they kind of hinge on the fact that no registered scientists have applied or, you know, or a pre-reg, you have to be a very strong pre-reg candidate to actually do that in the first place.
00:39:35:07 - 00:40:00:11
Speaker 2 – Alex
And then we sometimes wonder well where’s the gap between being a band five or band four technologist to then have enough experience to say, well, yeah, but I can be a pre-reg. So, I suppose this then counteracts that, doesn't it? Because you're given someone that contextual exposure, that contextual experience of doing like you say first checking which is like the first round of analysis for a given technique and disease sort of area,
00:40:00:13 - 00:40:15:24
Speaker 2 – Alex
and then it gives them that foundation to then go on to say, well, I can now build a portfolio because I can do X, Y, and Z within the lab. And I suppose the pre-reg positions will be they won't just do your first checks. They’ll also do a bit more, dare I say, like admin type roles within the lab.
00:40:15:24 - 00:40:39:04
Speaker 2 – Alex
So, they'll help out with the ongoing sort of roles in the lab. Like I don't know if you guys call it Duty Scientist, where you get your referral cards in and you'll need to triage them effectively around the lab or DNA needs to be exposed externally. All that sort of stuff. I take it the pre-reg's will be more implemented within the lab as a whole, rather than just your disease team
00:40:39:05 - 00:40:44:09
Speaker 2 - Alex
You'll be doing first checks and that's your position. So, they'll probably do a lot more for the lab.
00:40:44:11 - 00:41:07:18
Speaker 3 – Lorna
Our analysts do duty scientists, but our duty scientists are very, they have very distinct areas. So, I think we've got five different duty scientists working within Glasgow. So, the cytogenetics - molecular inherited, we've got one in molecular pathology, one in cytogenetics - somatic. So, the analysts do tend to take up a duty scientist role but in their specialised areas.
00:41:07:23 - 00:41:29:17
Speaker 2 - Alex
That is good to be fair. That is similar to ours, but I think because we are so separate, I know obviously you guys are all sort of in one building aren’t you, and only floors separate you, whereas hospitals separate our departments. So sometimes when obviously as you've described it is a specialist area and there are five duty scientists, but there probably are five duty scientists for us.
00:41:29:17 - 00:41:47:20
Speaker 2 - Alex
But because we feel so separate, there's only one for us. But it probably is exactly the same situation as yours. But yeah, I mean, that is, again, I think that would be great experience for a band 6 analyst to do that duty scientist role, because it is, you get such exposure to so many different things, don’t you, different requests that come to the lab.
00:41:47:20 - 00:41:51:19
Speaker 2 - Alex
Yeah. So, when did they start coming in the band 6 analyst roles?
00:41:51:19 - 00:42:12:05
Speaker 3 - Lorna
Say about five years ago or something like that and we we've had some people who've been technicians within the laboratory take up a band 6 analyst role and then stepped into the training role. So, it's almost that progression of, you know, learning the techniques, learning the basics of the analysis and the duty scientists and then stepping onto the training for clinical scientist.
00:42:12:05 - 00:42:14:01
Speaker 3 - Lorna
So, that's quite a nice progression route as well.
00:42:14:01 - 00:42:32:11
Speaker 2 – Alex
Yeah, that's really nice. I think that kind of as you were saying about sort of your advice to actually apply for these positions on the STP, it is important to know, like what the day-to-day job is. The scientist role is so heavy with analysis. You couldn’t physically do everything because there is that separation.
00:42:32:11 - 00:42:54:24
Speaker 2 - Alex
Now, I feel like maybe this band 6 analyst role actually links the kind of the two together again, because I feel like our department, well in in England especially, I think everywhere, every different lab that I've been to, the techs and the scientists do feel fairly separate now. Whereas I think you used to get techs that actually worked within a team rather than just techs doing techniques, for example.
00:42:54:24 - 00:43:20:18
Speaker 2 – Alex
So, I think that's quite good actually linking the two back together, because as I said, I think having that jump from it's not really a jump. I just think it's a pivot, isn't it, from a band five tech, for example, to go to a pre-reg because your whole day and structure and things that you're going to consider are completely different. Whereas at least the analyst role, it's like you've got that foundation of being able to do the techniques to then go on and analyse them, and then you start to get the exposure of what pre-reg's do.
00:43:20:18 - 00:43:25:12
Speaker 2 – Alex
So, I think that's quite a good answer to actually bridging that gap between the two and that's quite good.
00:43:25:17 - 00:43:44:05
Speaker 3 - Lorna
Yeah, I think it probably stems from the fact that a lot of people are struggling to fill clinical scientist roles. So, we have to start thinking about how we can change the workforce to bridge some of the gaps in that. But I think we're finding the same in Scotland as well with the separation of the technical stream and the scientific stream.
00:43:44:06 - 00:44:06:03
Speaker 3 – Lorna
Who obviously back on the A grade, B grade, you actually had a set amount of lab work that you had to do within the scheme, and that's completely different now because the clinical scientist trainees don't have time to go in and do 30 cytogenetic harvests and draw up however many slides and set up however many gels, that back in the day it was very regimented how much lab work you had to do.
00:44:06:03 - 00:44:32:13
Speaker 3 - Lorna
And it was a lot. But I think we are, we're seeing issues with trainees coming through without that technical knowledge. So, it's how to get that technical knowledge without spending time actually performing the techniques is a really tricky one. We find the other thing that we've tried to promote within Glasgow, and I know nationally they're considering this more and more, is the progression route within the technical stream because there shouldn't be a technical stream that goes to certain band.
00:44:32:13 - 00:44:49:23
Speaker 3 – Lorna
And then clinical scientists are overseeing them. So, we do have band 7 technical roles, Band 8A and an 8B technical lead role now in place in Glasgow and that's so important because, like I say, you shouldn't get to a certain band and then your only way for progression is to become a completely different role within the laboratory.
00:44:50:02 - 00:45:10:01
Speaker 2 - Alex
Yeah, 100%. Yeah. We've managed to do that in Oxford as well, because we realised that, even though it's great for people who do want to become scientists, to have that technologist or the lab work, especially in a diagnostic setting, is good experience for them, as we've just discussed. But I think, like you say, not every tech wants to become a scientist.
00:45:10:01 - 00:45:30:22
Speaker 2 - Alex
And I think if there is a ceiling where they can only get so far, it's not going to enable us to have good staff retention, I think, and you're going to lose a lot of your good technologists for really for no reason than inequality, really. So, let's say, yeah, we do have to pave the way for these roles because we have an eight B, senior genetic technologist.
00:45:30:24 - 00:46:02:09
Speaker 2 - Alex
Yeah, without her we’d, I honestly don't know where we’d be. The techs are so important, they are integral and, yeah, I think like you say, it is really important to have senior techs to have longevity and staff retention. So I think even for other techs that come in now that we know they only, that they want to stay as techs, it's important for them to even see that there are those jobs available, because then, like you say, they'll want to want to stick around and aim for something rather than just the standard ceiling of what the banding system has, you know, put in place for however many years.
00:46:02:14 - 00:46:14:19
Speaker 1 – Daniel
So also, I think while we're talking about roles, for, again, the benefit of listeners who maybe aren't entirely sure of the sort of entry level roles they might be able to get in the lab, Lorna, I don't know if you're able to give a sort of brief description of them.
00:46:15:00 - 00:46:43:10
Speaker 3 – Lorna
Yes, there's a lot of roles in the lab, and I think that's why it's quite important if you are interested in working within genomics, genomics in the NHS, is to have a look at the different roles. So, we can have a role within sample reception, where you’re booking through the samples and triaging them and working with duty scientists to make sure the samples are booked into the systems and going to the right places. There’s roles within extractions, to extract the correct amount of DNA using the correct equipment.
00:46:43:12 - 00:47:05:19
Speaker 3 - Lorna
And all different sample types go through there. There're also real roles within the technical areas. So that could be within genotyping areas. Within NGS, you could be working on the technical processes. There's a lot of different roles and a lot of different gradings within those roles as well. So, it's important to look at the lab that you want to work in and what their structures are,
00:47:05:19 - 00:47:18:08
Speaker 3 - Lorna
Because every lab is completely different. You have a different structure, and they might have a different workforce and, unless you go in and familiarize yourself with what the job is in each of these different roles, you wouldn't know where you’re aiming for.
00:47:18:12 - 00:47:35:02
Speaker 1 – Daniel
We certainly see people that go into a sample reception and then go into the sort of technical roles and so, like you were saying earlier, people that move their way up. So, it definitely gives good experience, even if your end goal is to do the training or it gives you a good jumping off point almost into a healthcare science as a career.
00:47:35:02 - 00:47:53:16
Speaker 3 - Lorna
One of the most important knowledge - when you start working in the NHS is how to work in the NHS and quite a lot of that is, you know, quality management, accreditation, the importance of patient safety. You learn all that no matter what role you’re in, so if you can get through into a department and start learning to put that in applications.
00:47:53:16 - 00:48:06:20
Speaker 3 – Lorna
That really does show. You can work with people as well. You could learn from the people, and you can be involved in quality management and all the other processes within the laboratory, so you can get a lot more into your application if you if you want to get a foot in the door and start learning these things.
00:48:07:01 - 00:48:24:20
Speaker 1 - Daniel
As a sort of rounding up question, obviously genomics is sort of always evolving and changing, and our lab is getting bigger and busier and more samples every year. So just with this in mind, there's obviously a need for more clinical scientists. They're extremely hard to find. Do you think the training programs remain in the same mould it is in just now?
00:48:24:20 - 00:48:32:04
Speaker 1 - Daniel
Do you see any major changes to it in the future? or any differences in the way that you recruit trainees and therefore scientists, down the line?
00:48:32:04 - 00:49:03:04
Speaker 3 - Lorna
I think so, things will have to change and there's a, I think we have to decide the best way to train clinical scientists and what are our basic requirement is. We talk about it a lot, what we are we actually asking for in that minimally competent clinical scientist level and I don't think there's a definitive answer to that. Everybody seems to expect something different from that minimally competent clinical scientist that's coming through. I think as a profession we need to look at that and decide what it is that we want and have a look at the other roles and workforce planning,
00:49:03:06 - 00:49:25:09
Speaker 3 - Lorna
has to improve. We have to look at what the other roles are and how we can work together to function better, to provide a higher throughput of the samples coming through. I think everyone these days has been asked to do more with less, but it's looking at what we've got and how we can use it. Unfortunately, Yeah, clinical scientists, there aren't very many coming through. But even in a department as big as Glasgow.
00:49:25:09 - 00:49:44:12
Speaker 3 - Lorna
So, we've got over 130 staff. We've only got a certain amount of training that we can do because we've got so many examples coming through such a stretched service. We can't suddenly take on 15 clinical scientist trainees and expect to put them out at the end of three years at a good level. We have to look at how we do it differently.
00:49:44:12 - 00:50:06:04
Speaker 3 - Lorna
So, things are going to change differently, whether that's the roles themselves or whether that's the training scheme, I'm not sure at the moment. But the genomic transformation team within NSC, are looking at how we can move forward with genomics in Scotland and how things should be changing and we have got a workforce stream.
00:50:06:06 - 00:50:16:09
Speaker 3 - Lorna
And discussions have to be around how we managed to increase our sample numbers with staffing levels that we've got and the clinical scientists that we’ve got coming through.
00:50:16:11 - 00:50:27:12
Speaker 1 – Daniel
It’s all about striking that balance between training but not putting too much on to existing clinical scientists that it affects their work because they’re too busy training and also, you need to train. So, it's difficult to find that balance.
00:50:27:12 - 00:50:45:05
Speaker 3 - Lorna
Absolutely. Especially when the sample numbers are going up and up. Our cancer genomics is going through the roof, and we're expecting the same amount of staff to do all these extra samples and train the upcoming clinical scientists at the same time. So, I think a lot of departments are getting to breaking point. So, we are going to have to look at how to do it better.
00:50:45:06 - 00:50:45:15
Speaker 3 - Lorna
00:50:45:16 - 00:50:54:18
Speaker 1 – Daniel
I think we've come to the end. Just sort of a nice way to end I think, is to ask if you've got any particular big achievements, a particular point of your career that you're proud of?
00:50:54:21 - 00:51:19:18
Speaker 3 - Lorna
I think achievement wise. for me, years ago I would have said the RC Path. I think I did that quite early on. And I do promote finishing your registration and moving on to the RC path exams because it teaches you a lot it's another huge step up. So, years ago, I would have probably said that. But I think these days I think I'm more proud of the fact that, I take opportunities when they come up.
00:51:19:24 - 00:51:42:08
Speaker 3 - Lorna
I had a secondment with NES really early on in my career as well. they put out an advert to say you would like to come work with this one day a week and have a look at this new STP when it was coming out, and whether we should have a look at that in Scotland and implement it. So very early on, when the STP was first out I worked with NES, I work with the HCPC now and I'm part of the team that accredits these direct entry HCPC programs.
00:51:42:08 - 00:52:02:21
Speaker 3 - Lorna
I also work with Scottish Government on various projects and the genomic transformation team. I think, I think I'm more proud of the fact that I take opportunities when they come up and I think if you want them to continue to enjoy your role, you need to have a look at what's out there and try and diversify a little bit, but make sure that you're taking all the opportunities that you can.
00:52:03:02 - 00:52:10:14
Speaker 1 – Daniel
I suppose it’s good you’re out there taking opportunities rather than waiting for opportunities to come to you. I think that's the difference isn’t it. Proactive rather than reactive.
00:52:10:14 - 00:52:33:08
Speaker 3 - Lorna
And there's a lot of kind of email subscriptions that you can get onto. NES send out emails offering up secondments all the time. Scottish Government are always looking for people to collaborate. There's a lot of different groups and opportunities. HCPC are continually asking for people to work for them and people like, you know, the Academy of Healthcare Science and the Association of Clinical Scientists are always looking for assessors.
00:52:33:08 - 00:52:43:01
Speaker 3 - Lorna
So, if you're interested in picking up different roles, there's lots of them out there that you can do and that's before you even look at external quality and accreditation roles.
00:52:43:01 - 00:52:44:19
Speaker 1 - Daniel
Yeah. Thanks for coming on. Appreciate it,
00:52:44:21 - 00:52:45:17
Speaker 2 - Alex
It's lovely to meet you.
00:52:45:17 - 00:52:45:21
Speaker 3 - Lorna
Yeah. You too
00:52:46:06 - 00:52:47:08
Speaker 3 - Lorna
And I'll see you later.
00:52:47:10 - 00:53:29:07
Speaker 2 - Alex
Thanks Lorna. Cheers. [Lorna] Bye. [Alex] So, this concludes this podcast series on education and careers. Overall, we've explored the MSc in Medical Genetics and Genomics, staff engagement and external education, both locally and internationally. We've gone through pathways leading to genetic counselling and laboratory medicine and would finally like to thank all of our guests throughout the series who have given up their time to join us and produce some important and interesting conversations.