Sunday Times 2
SAITM: Facts, fiction and facilities
View(s):Letter to the Editor
I read with interest the article published in Sunday Times 2 (12.03.2017), titled ‘Freedom for Education: Free Education and SAITM’ by Professor Chandrika Jayasinghe, especially, inter alia, with her contention that “…Our government leaders are to be blamed for this stagnant state of affairs, while many poorer countries have overtaken us because they have national policies and successive governments are committed to implementing the national policies……”.
However, may I take this opportunity to clarify certain factual inaccuracies that appear to have crept into the article, of my esteemed colleague especially in the para pertaining to ‘SAITM and private education’.
Professor Jayasinghe states, “… While old medical faculties with fully fledged staff, facilities and with extremely heavy patient populations to cater to the educational needs, take closer to 200 students a year, SAITM with mostly visiting staff with handful of patients in one ward in a 1100 bed strength hospital, with no community health care training facility or forensic medicine training facility has enrolled about double that amount per year…”.
This assertion that while state medical institutes take in 200 students per year and that SAITM’s intake is double to that is totally incorrect.
Let me point out the true position at SAITM.
The number of students who followed the MBBS programme in SAITM included less than forty in the first few batches (2009-2010) and the annual intake was at average of 110 in subsequent batches.
The professor also mistakenly states that “SAITM with mostly visiting staff.” This statement too is incorrect. SAITM has an academic panel comprising a total of 194 faculty staff, which includes 19 professors, 76 senior lecturers, and 59 lecturers. Surely, these figures are comparatively qualitatively much better than some of the state medical schools. We emphasise that SAITM professors who are also the heads of departments are well-experienced academics who have served the state for many years.
With regard to the question of training in community health and forensic medicine, it also appears that the professor is unaware that SAITM students are currently following such training in state sector health hospitals which includes one month practical Community Health training in Kaduwela MOH area, and one month of training in practical forensic medicine under the Judicial medical officer at Avissawella Hospital.
Referring to standards of SAITM, the Professor states that “the University Grants Commission which is keen on maintaining standards of government medical faculties has failed in its duty to recognise this blatant lack of standard.” This is indeed a rather harsh and unfair indictment on SAITM standards. In July 2015, the SLMC review team visited SAITM and in its subsequent report, the SLMC states that it was satisfied with the following components of standards such as curriculum, entry criteria, student- staff ratio, staff profile, infrastructure facilities, assessment methods and are included as positive aspects of SAITM.
According to SLMC Review Committee Report, the following three areas were identified as deficiencies.
Lack of community health training in a state MOH area
Lack of forensic medicine training in a state hospital
Inadequate clinical training due to comparatively low numbers of inward patients to the numbers of students
SAITM graduates have already fulfilled the first two of them. The third deficiency which was identified was considering the inward patient numbers available for the entire student population of SAITM.
As the first few batches had less than 40 students in each batch, the clinical training provided to them was clearly adequate with the in-ward patient numbers available during their training. Further apprenticeship type of clinical training occurred with inward patients augmented with other methods of clinical training such as using clinic patients (ambulatory teaching), simulation techniques ,called-up patients and also by utilising other busy private hospitals for their training.
For the subsequent batches, steps have been already taken for the conversion of Neville Fernando Teaching Hospital into a state hospital based on the Higher Education Parliamentary sub sector committee proposals of PPP (Private public partnership) and the process is expected to be completed within next few months.
These proposals also included providing clinical training at busy state hospitals for at least one month each in major clinical disciplines for a payment, which will also benefit the state sector health system. This rightful opportunity of SAITM students for exposure to state health system for part of clinical training on a fee-levying basis had been in negotiation with the Ministry of Health since the inception of SAITM. However, due to undue pressures from trade unions, the Ministry of Health has delayed this move up to date. If the government policy is to sustain quality private medical education within the country, it is the responsibility of the state to take all the requisite urgent measures to implement this proposal of providing a part of the necessary clinical training in government hospitals without any further delay.
We understand that the Ministry of Higher Education is currently drafting a legal document which will stringently monitor all medical faculties and also that the SLMC is in the process of drafting the long felt need of minimum prescribed standards for a medical school.
We wholeheartedly welcome and endorse such moves and agree that any medical education institution, be it state or private, should be exhaustively monitored by the above state authorities.
Professor Deepthi Samarage
MBBS(Cey), MD ( Paed), MRCP(UK), FSLC(Paed)
Professor/Head of Dept. of Paediatrics, SAITM