RESUMEN

Background: Delivering research skills training to health professionals through short, applied sessions outside a formal higher education program, can help fill gaps in training and build research capacity in clinical settings. This has been the endeavor of some of the Applied Research Collaborations funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research in England since 2014. How to evaluate this type of training in terms of the wider impact it may have, has not featured heavily in the literature and methods have largely borrowed from more generic approaches to training evaluation which can over-simplify outcomes and ignore longer-term impacts. Methods: We developed the framework in four stages: mapping potential impacts of our research skills training courses to identify key concepts; shaping into three domains in which impact could be expected, informed by established definitions of research capacity building; testing the initial framework and adapting wording of impacts; refining the framework into a practical tool. Results: The final framework specifies types of impact in three domains of influence - individual, group/organization and health system, and maps these against key questions to guide inquiry, as well as suggested methods for capturing the impact and expected timeframe for each type of impact. Discussion: The framework provides a structure for guiding the evaluation of research training as well as a focus on medium-longer term impacts, encouraging a broader and continuous approach to evaluation. It is hoped this will support educators in other contexts and fields, in the planning of a wider range of training evaluation activities, to capture impact more fully.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: An innovative funding scheme for health care librarians to attend an intensive short course in teaching evidence-based practice was established in the West of England in 2016. This evaluation aims to understand the value of the scheme and the impact of the training opportunity for the librarians, establish an evidence base for continuing with the funding scheme, and inform the development of plans to build additional capacity among health care librarians to provide critical appraisal training. METHODS: Seven librarians working in health care system settings were funded by the scheme between 2016 and 2018. Post-course feedback forms gathered initial views on course content and delivery, which informed the development of questions for the qualitative phase of the evaluation. All seven librarians participated in group discussions and individual interviews. RESULTS: The course boosted confidence, provided valuable new skills, and positively impacted careers of the librarians through access to new opportunities. It inspired the development of new approaches to critical appraisal training. An important need was identified among the librarians for more education in teaching. Librarians funded by the scheme have successfully cascaded the training to their colleagues. CONCLUSION: This evaluation supports the continuation of the funding scheme to further build capacity among health care librarians to teach evidence-based practice. It suggests additional investment in this type of specialist training, as well as in education in teaching skills, would be beneficial for health care librarians. Evidence from this evaluation is informing new plans to support these professionals with the vital service they provide, which contributes to the evidence-based culture of their organizations and to patient outcomes.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIM: Clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in England are responsible for the health of their populations through the services they provide, yet we know that the use of evidence to inform commissioning decisions is low. A programme of training in seven CCGs in England was instigated in a joint piece of work by the National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care and Academic Health Science Network in the West of England, to help build an evidence informed culture in commissioning. METHODS: Evidence workshops were delivered in each of the seven CCGs in the West of England by an experienced senior lecturer (the author) and local healthcare librarians. The workshop was developed by the author and an information scientist and included guidance and demonstration of a systematic evidence search covering both traditional and grey literature, and a brief look at quality of evidence including a critical appraisal activity. Participants were asked to evaluate the workshop on the day and to indicate an intended action they would take as a result of the workshop; a short follow-up interview was carried out with a sample of participants between 3 and 6 months later, to identify any longer term impact of the training. RESULTS: A total of 63 staff in a variety of commissioning-related roles attended the workshops between March and September 2016. 95% rated the workshop overall as either 'excellent' or 'good'. Of particular value was the involvement of the local healthcare librarian, helping to promote their expertise and services; and the discussion of grey literature as a valuable source of evidence. A variety of intended actions as a result of the training included initiating a thorough search for evidence for new projects, use of bibliographic databases, and making use of local library services for evidence searching. Follow-up interviews with nine staff revealed a positive impact in the longer-term. This ranged from simply triggering an interest in using evidence, boosting motivation and sharing information with colleagues; to changes in processes such as broadening the responsibility for finding and filtering evidence for business cases; to one clear case of financial savings resulting from a search for evidence by a senior commissioning manager. CONCLUSION: Offering short, interactive training workshops is valued by healthcare commissioners and can make a difference to their approach to and use of evidence in decision-making. There is a need for a flexible approach to the concept of evidence in healthcare commissioning, which includes the use of grey literature, and training can encourage and support the systematic search for an appraisal of this type of evidence. Tools for improving and sustaining this aspect of evidence use by commissioners are included here.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Increasing research capacity is important for health services as part of improving the conduct of high-quality research, which addresses the needs of patients and the public. It is a core function of the 13 Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs) established in England between 2008 and 2013. This article reports on the development of an innovative capacity building programme in CLAHRC West over an 18-month period (May 2015 to December 2016). It aims to disseminate the learning from the initiative and share our experience with other CLAHRCs. STUDY DESIGN: The study design was an evaluation of a training programme to build research capacity. METHODS: We carried out a training needs assessment among local stakeholders and scoped existing provision of research-related training. This informed the development of a programme of free short courses, which were targeted at health and social care professionals including those working in local authorities and the voluntary sector. We aimed to engage professionals working at all levels in these organisations and to promote interprofessional education, to build a research culture. We engaged a variety of educators to provide a range of 1-day courses at an introductory level, which were accessible to practitioners. RESULTS: During the first 18 months of the training programme, we delivered 31 courses and trained 350 participants. Attendees came from secondary care (20%), voluntary sector (18%) and local authorities (18%). Professionals working in the mental health sector comprised 11% and commissioning 6%. Less well represented were primary care (3%) and community care (4%). The largest professional group was public health, followed by medical, nursing and allied health professionals in approximately equal proportions. Courses were evaluated on a scale of 1 (poor) to 4 (excellent) with the mean being 3.6 (range 3.3-4.0). CONCLUSIONS: The training programme has been highly successful with many courses oversubscribed, and all courses being well evaluated by participants. It has met the needs of local professionals for brief, applied training in research, as well as attracting those from other parts of the United Kingdom, suggesting the courses are both appropriate and helping to fill a gap in provision. We are building on this work to further engage audiences working in areas such as the wider determinants of health and commissioning, as well as primary and community sectors. CLAHRCs are uniquely placed to drive a culture change in the use, understanding and application of research across the healthcare community.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

This article draws attention to the dual global problems of disordered eating and overweight/obesity among children and adolescents. It is well recognised that the main risk factor for disordered eating is body dissatisfaction, yet public health messages to tackle overweight/obesity are likely to increase body dissatisfaction. This tension between key public health messages and a health psychology approach is examined, with the goal of seeking a common way forward. We focus on the UK as a case study, where there is currently no statutory education in schools on body image. Since more prescriptive guidance on the curriculum covering personal/social/health issues is soon to be introduced, it is timely to consider the content, and in particular its impact on body image as well as overweight/obesity. Having reviewed current interventions and policy, we argue for a more holistic approach to the obesity problem, using a whole school approach to create a body confident culture.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: General practice is a popular placement in the second year of Foundation training. Evaluations suggest this is a positive experience for most trainee doctors and benefits their perceptions of primary care, but the impact on primary care supervisors has not been considered. At a time when placements may need to increase, understanding the experience of the GP supervisors responsible for these placements is important. AIM: To explore the views, experiences and needs of GPs who supervise F2 doctors in their practices including their perceptions of the benefits to individuals and practices. DESIGN AND SETTING: A qualitative approach with GPs from across Severn Postgraduate Medical Education who supervise F2 doctors. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with 15 GPs between December 2012 and April 2013. RESULTS: GP supervisors are enthusiastic about helping F2 doctors to appreciate the uniqueness of primary care. Workload and responsibility around supervision is considerable making a supportive team important. Working with young, enthusiastic doctors boosts morale in the team. The presence of freshly trained minds prompts GPs to consider their own learning needs. Being a supervisor can increase job satisfaction; the teaching role gives respite from the demanding nature of GP work. CONCLUSION: Supervisors are positive about working with F2s, who lift morale in the team and challenge GPs in their own practice and learning. This boosts job and personal satisfaction. Nonetheless, consideration should be given to managing teaching workload and team support for supervision.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: General practice is becoming increasingly complex due to an ageing population with multiple morbidities and the shift of services from secondary to primary care, yet GP training remains largely the same. Extended training is now recommended, initially proposed as a fourth GP specialty trainee year, but more recently as a broad-based 4-year specialty training programme. AIM: To explore the views of newly-qualified GPs about their training and preparedness for specific aspects of the GP's role. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study with newly-qualified GPs who qualified with Severn Deanery between 2007 and 2010. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with 18 GPs between November 2011 and April 2012. RESULTS: Gaining experience in a variety of primary care environments widens insight into patient populations as well as helping GPs develop adaptability and confidence, although this is not routinely part of GP training. However, alongside variety, having continuity with patients in practice remains important. Opportunities to be involved in the management of a practice or to take on substantial leadership roles also vary widely and this may limit preparedness and development of generalist skills. CONCLUSION: Extended training could help prepare GPs for the current challenges of general practice. It could ensure all trainees are exposed to a greater variety of primary care settings including those outside GP practice, as well as experience of business, finance, and leadership roles. Collectively, these changes have the potential to produce GPs with both generalist and enhanced skills, who are better prepared to work collaboratively across the organisational boundaries between primary, secondary, and community care.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Workplace-based assessment (WPBA) is now a central feature of postgraduate training and required for Membership of the Royal College of General Practitioners (MRCGP). A previous study established that many GP trainees question the validity and usefulness of WPBA during hospital posts. Many of the factors identified, for example superficial feedback, leniency and a 'tick box' culture, suggested that assessors may hold some of the answers about how to improve the system. AIM: To explore the views of hospital-based assessors across a range of specialities about how WPBA works with GP trainees. DESIGN: A qualitative approach was taken to explore views in-depth by means of one-to-one interviews. SETTING: Three training locations within Severn Deanery. METHODS: Consultants were sampled purposively and 15 took part in semi-structured interviews between November 2010 and May 2011. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and analysed using a thematic framework approach. RESULTS: While WPBA provides a mandate for giving feedback to trainees, assessors say that honesty can be lacking and they find giving negative feedback hard to handle. Nonetheless, the verbal and qualitative elements of the process are valued and bring a crucial depth to the process. Assessors are not familiar with GP training requirements and would benefit from more contact with GP leads and supervisors. CONCLUSIONS: The views of assessors in this study echo those of the GP trainees in the earlier study, emphasising areas where action should be taken to strengthen the system of assessment so that WPBA improves the performance of doctors. The professional conversation and scope for free text comments hold the most potential for adding value to the process. Sharing information across hospital and GP supervisors could also help recognise high-achieving trainees, not just those who are struggling. This would help to address a central criticism that WPBA is focused on a minimum standard of competence rather than excellence, thus losing an important motivation among trainees and weakening the effect of WPBA in helping to deliver better doctors.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Workplace-based assessment (WBPA) was introduced in 2007 as a new approach to monitoring competence of GP specialist trainees (GPSTs). It includes a raft of assessments carried out in the workplace to assess what a trainee actually does in clinical practice. The assessment tools used are adapted from other contexts of doctors' training but little is known about how they function in day-to-day practice within GP training or how valid and useful they are found to be by trainees. AIM: To establish how the new system of WPBA is working in day-to-day practice for GPSTs in hospital posts. DESIGN: A mixed methods design including quantitative and qualitative phases of data collection. SETTING: Two training locations within Severn Deanery. METHODS: A questionnaire was completed by 52 GPSTs (67% response rate) currently in hospital posts. Twenty-two took part in focus groups and semi-structured interviews to explore key findings from the questionnaire in greater depth. RESULTS: There is value in the face-to-face contact between trainees and senior doctors. However, quality and depth of feedback are not consistent and there is evidence of poor use of the tools, reducing the value of the assessments. The system is further undermined by a clear perception of bias and lack of honesty in judgements which limit the scope for assessment to lead to learning. Overall, these weaknesses may impair the validity and usefulness of the system and its potential to improve the performance of doctors. CONCLUSIONS: General practice trainees in this study have a low opinion of how WPBA assessments function in the hospital setting. Changes are needed to optimise the potential of WPBA to improve the performance of doctors in training and to increase its credibility.

Asunto(s)