A novel blended and interprofessional approach to pediatric emergency training: self-assessment, perception, and perceived long-term effects.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH BMC Medical Education Pub Date : 2024-11-28 DOI:10.1186/s12909-024-06381-3
Ronny Lehmann, Michaela Klinke Petrowsky, Anke Seitz, Jochen Meyburg, Walter Eppich, Georg F Hoffmann, Burkhard Tönshoff, Sören Huwendiek
{"title":"A novel blended and interprofessional approach to pediatric emergency training: self-assessment, perception, and perceived long-term effects.","authors":"Ronny Lehmann, Michaela Klinke Petrowsky, Anke Seitz, Jochen Meyburg, Walter Eppich, Georg F Hoffmann, Burkhard Tönshoff, Sören Huwendiek","doi":"10.1186/s12909-024-06381-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We developed a blended training program at a tertiary pediatric center based on hospital-specific emergency guidelines, profession-specific Virtual Patients (VPs), and interprofessional team training. Using this novel approach, we addressed differing educational needs of medical and nursing staff and intrinsic cognitive overload among participants, aiming for harmonization of in-house emergency proceedings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Self-assessments of pediatric emergency knowledge and skills were conducted before (T1) and after (T2) preparation using VPs, as well as after the team training day (T3). At T3, participants completed questionnaires on the training approach, its components, and learning impact. Ten months after the training, a follow-up survey (T4) queried perceived benefits within and beyond emergency situations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 56 medical staff and 56 nursing staff members participated in the pilot phase. Of these, N = 55 (98%) and N = 48 (85%), respectively, returned self-assessments; questionnaires were completed by N = 55 (98%) and N = 51 (91%), respectively. In both groups, 57 participants (50.9%) completed the follow-up survey. After team training (T3), both groups had statistically significant increased knowledge and skill scores compared with those at T1. Regarding the blended approach and its components, medical and nursing staff alike rated the entire course and its guidelines, the preparatory VPs, and the team training very highly. Participants felt being better prepared for pediatric emergencies. Perceived strengths of the training approach were in the triangulation of teaching methods and its interprofessionalism. More training scenarios were requested, as well as recurrent training. In the follow-up, participants reported improved confidence and calmness, as well as improved communication and collaboration when involved in an emergency. Beyond emergencies, benefits were reported in daily routines.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our blended approach was perceived as being effective in improving preparedness among medical and nursing house staff. This approach permits customization of content and deliberate practice to improve pediatric critical care.</p>","PeriodicalId":51234,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Education","volume":"24 1","pages":"1389"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11606109/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06381-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: We developed a blended training program at a tertiary pediatric center based on hospital-specific emergency guidelines, profession-specific Virtual Patients (VPs), and interprofessional team training. Using this novel approach, we addressed differing educational needs of medical and nursing staff and intrinsic cognitive overload among participants, aiming for harmonization of in-house emergency proceedings.

Methods: Self-assessments of pediatric emergency knowledge and skills were conducted before (T1) and after (T2) preparation using VPs, as well as after the team training day (T3). At T3, participants completed questionnaires on the training approach, its components, and learning impact. Ten months after the training, a follow-up survey (T4) queried perceived benefits within and beyond emergency situations.

Results: A total of 56 medical staff and 56 nursing staff members participated in the pilot phase. Of these, N = 55 (98%) and N = 48 (85%), respectively, returned self-assessments; questionnaires were completed by N = 55 (98%) and N = 51 (91%), respectively. In both groups, 57 participants (50.9%) completed the follow-up survey. After team training (T3), both groups had statistically significant increased knowledge and skill scores compared with those at T1. Regarding the blended approach and its components, medical and nursing staff alike rated the entire course and its guidelines, the preparatory VPs, and the team training very highly. Participants felt being better prepared for pediatric emergencies. Perceived strengths of the training approach were in the triangulation of teaching methods and its interprofessionalism. More training scenarios were requested, as well as recurrent training. In the follow-up, participants reported improved confidence and calmness, as well as improved communication and collaboration when involved in an emergency. Beyond emergencies, benefits were reported in daily routines.

Conclusions: Our blended approach was perceived as being effective in improving preparedness among medical and nursing house staff. This approach permits customization of content and deliberate practice to improve pediatric critical care.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一种新颖的混合和跨专业的儿科急诊培训方法:自我评估、感知和感知的长期效果。
背景:我们在一家三级儿科中心开发了一个基于医院特定急诊指南、专业特定虚拟患者(VPs)和跨专业团队培训的混合培训计划。使用这种新颖的方法,我们解决了医疗和护理人员的不同教育需求以及参与者内在的认知超载,旨在协调内部紧急程序。方法:采用VPs进行儿科急救知识和技能的自我评估,分别在准备前(T1)和准备后(T2)以及团队训练日(T3)后进行。在第三阶段,参与者完成了关于培训方法、组成部分和学习影响的问卷调查。培训10个月后,进行了后续调查(T4),询问紧急情况内外的感知效益。结果:共有56名医务人员和56名护理人员参加了试点阶段。其中,N = 55(98%)和N = 48(85%)分别返回了自我评估;问卷完成率N = 55 (98%), N = 51(91%)。两组均有57人(50.9%)完成随访调查。团队训练(T3)后,两组学生的知识和技能得分均较T1有统计学意义的提高。关于混合方法及其组成部分,医务人员和护理人员对整个课程及其指导方针、预备副总裁和团队培训都给予了很高的评价。参与者感到对儿科紧急情况准备得更好。培训方法的优势体现在教学方法的三角化和其专业性。要求提供更多的训练方案以及经常性训练。在后续行动中,参与者报告说,在紧急情况下,他们的信心和冷静有所提高,沟通和协作也有所改善。除了紧急情况外,在日常生活中也报告了益处。结论:我们的混合方法被认为是有效地提高医疗和养老院工作人员的准备。这种方法允许定制的内容和刻意的实践,以提高儿科重症监护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Education
BMC Medical Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
795
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Education is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the training of healthcare professionals, including undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing education. The journal has a special focus on curriculum development, evaluations of performance, assessment of training needs and evidence-based medicine.
期刊最新文献
Cognitive alignment and assessment validity in a high-stakes dental specialty examination: a Bloom's taxonomy-based analysis. Impact of the Prehospital Cardiac Arrest Sonographic Assessment (CASA) Mini-Course on Knowledge and Simulation-Based Diagnostic Performance among Thai Paramedic Students. Nationwide assessment of burnout among medical undergraduates in Saudi Arabia using the Maslach Burnout Inventory. PROfessionalism in Partnership for Education Research (PROPER) study: a novel online initiative approach to professionalism education. Pedagogical impact of different levels of e-learning teaching during anesthesia residency: a randomized clinical trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1