Development of a programme to facilitate interprofessional simulation-based training for final year undergraduate healthcare students

Original report can be found at: http://www.health.heacademy.ac.uk/publications/miniproject/alinier260109.pdfIntroduction: Students have few opportunities to practise alongside students from other disciplines. Simulation offers an ideal context to provide them with concrete experience in a safe and controlled environment. This project was about the development of a programme to facilitate interprofessional scenario-based simulation training for final year undergraduate healthcare students and explored whether simulation improved trainees’ knowledge of other healthcare discipline’s roles and skills. Methods: A multidisciplinary academic project team was created and trained for the development and facilitation of this project. The team worked on the development of appropriate multiprofessional scenarios and a strategy to recruit the final year students on a volunteer basis to the project. By the end of the project 95 students were involved in small groups to one of fifteen 3-hour interprofessional simulation sessions. Staff role played the relatives, doctor on call, and patient when it was more appropriate than using a patient simulator (Laerdal SimMan/SimBaby) in the simulated community setting and paediatric or adult emergency department. Each session had 3 to 4 of the following disciplines represented (Adult/Children/Learning Disability Nursing, Paramedic, Radiography, Physiotherapy) and each student observed and took part in one long and relevant high-fidelity scenario. Half the students were randomly selected to fill in a 40-item questionnaire testing their knowledge of other disciplines before the simulation (control group) and the others after (experimental group). Students were assessed on the questions relating to the disciplines represented in their session. Results: By the end of the project 95 questionnaires were collected of which 45 were control group students (Questionnaire before simulation) and 50 experimental group students (Questionnaire after simulation). Both groups were comparable in terms of gender, discipline and age representation. Participants were: Adult nurses (n=46), Children’s nurses (n=4), Learning Disability nurses (n=7), Nurses, Paramedics (n=8), Radiographers (n=20), Physiotherapists (n=8). 15 sessions were run with an average of around 7 participants and at least 3 disciplines represented. The knowledge test results about the disciplines represented was significantly different between the control and experimental groups (Control 73.80%, 95% CI 70.95-76.65; and Experimental 78.81%, 95% CI 75.76-81.87, p=0.02). In addition, there were sometimes reliable differences between the groups in their view of multidisciplinary training; confidence about working as part of a multidisciplinary team was 3.33 (SD=0.80, Control) and 3.79 (SD=0.90, Experimental), p=0.011; their anticipation that working as part of a multidisciplinary team would make them feel anxious was 2.67 (SD=1.17, Control) and 2.25 (SD=1.04, Experimental), p=0.073; their perception of their knowledge of what other healthcare professionals can or cannot do was 3.00 (SD=0.91, Control) and 3.35 (SD=0.93, Experimental), p=0.066; their view that learning with other healthcare students before qualification will improve their relationship after qualification was 3.93 (SD=1.14, Control) and 4.33 (SD=0.81, Experimental), p=0.055; their opinion about interprofessional learning helping them to become better team workers before qualification was 3.96 (SD=1.24, Control) and 4.42 (SD=0.77, Experimental), p=0.036. Conclusions: Although the difference is relatively small (~5%), the results demonstrate that students gained confidence and knowledge about the skills and role of other disciplines involved in their session. Through simulation, the positivism of students about different aspects of learning or working with other healthcare disciplines has significantly improved. Students gained knowledge of other disciplines simply by being given the opportunity to take part in a multiprofessional scenario and observe another one. The results of the test and their reported perception about multidisciplinary team working suggest that they are better prepared to enter the healthcare workforce. Discussions during the debriefings highlighted the fact that multidisciplinary training is important. The main challenges identified have been the voluntary student attendance and timetabling issues forcing us to run the session late in the day due to the number of disciplines involved in each session and their different placement rota. The aim is now to timetable formally this session within their curriculum. Introducing simulation in the undergraduate curriculum should facilitate its implementation as Continuing Professional Development once these students become qualified healthcare professionals

Developing the scales on evaluation beliefs of student teachers

The purpose of the study reported in this paper was to investigate the validity and the reliability of a newly developed questionnaire named ‘Teacher Evaluation Beliefs’ (TEB). The framework for developing items was provided by the two models. The first model focuses on Student-Centered and Teacher-Centered beliefs about evaluation while the other centers on five dimensions (what/ who/ when/ why/ how). The validity and reliability of the new instrument was investigated using both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis study (n=446). Overall results indicate that the two-factor structure is more reasonable than the five-factor one. Further research needs additional items about the latent dimensions “what” ”who” ”when” ”why” “how” for each existing factor based on Student-centered and Teacher-centered approaches

Media Usage in Post-Secondary Education and Implications for Teaching and Learning

The Web 2.0 has permeated academic life. The use of online information services in post-secondary education has led to dramatic changes in faculty teaching methods as well as in the learning and study behavior of students. At the same time, traditional information media, such as textbooks and printed handouts, still form the basic pillars of teaching and learning. This paper reports the results of a survey about media usage in teaching and learning conducted with Western University students and instructors, highlighting trends in the usage of new and traditional media in higher education by instructors and students. In addition, the survey comprises part of an international research program in which 20 universities from 10 countries are currently participating. Further, the study will hopefully become a part of the ongoing discussion of practices and policies that purport to advance the effective use of media in teaching and learning

Lessons from dynamic cadaver and invasive bone pin studies: do we know how the foot really moves during gait?

Background: This paper provides a summary of a Keynote lecture delivered at the 2009 Australasian Podiatry Conference. The aim of the paper is to review recent research that has adopted dynamic cadaver and invasive kinematics research approaches to better understand foot and ankle kinematics during gait. It is not intended to systematically cover all literature related to foot and ankle kinematics (such as research using surface mounted markers). Since the paper is based on a keynote presentation its focuses on the authors own experiences and work in the main, drawing on the work of others where appropriate Methods: Two approaches to the problem of accessing and measuring the kinematics of individual anatomical structures in the foot have been taken, (i) static and dynamic cadaver models, and (ii) invasive in-vivo research. Cadaver models offer the advantage that there is complete access to all the tissues of the foot, but the cadaver must be manipulated and loaded in a manner which replicates how the foot would have performed when in-vivo. The key value of invasive in-vivo foot kinematics research is the validity of the description of foot kinematics, but the key difficulty is how generalisable this data is to the wider population. Results: Through these techniques a great deal has been learnt. We better understand the valuable contribution mid and forefoot joints make to foot biomechanics, and how the ankle and subtalar joints can have almost comparable roles. Variation between people in foot kinematics is high and normal. This includes variation in how specific joints move and how combinations of joints move. The foot continues to demonstrate its flexibility in enabling us to get from A to B via a large number of different kinematic solutions. Conclusion: Rather than continue to apply a poorly founded model of foot type whose basis is to make all feet meet criteria for the mechanical 'ideal' or 'normal' foot, we should embrace variation between feet and identify it as an opportunity to develop patient-specific clinical models of foot function